10/07/1993 CITY COMMISSION MEETING
October 7, 1993
The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in regular session at City Hall, Thursday, October 7, 1993 at 6:00 p.m., with the following members present:
Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner
Arthur X. Deegan, II Vice-Mayor/Commissioner
Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner
Sue A. Berfield Commissioner
Fred A. Thomas Commissioner
Also present:
Michael J. Wright City Manager
M.A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney
William C. Baker Public Works Director
Scott Shuford Central Permitting Director
Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk
The Mayor called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was offered by Reverend Thurman Rivers of Skycrest United Methodist Church.
In order to provide continuity for research, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order.
ITEM #3 - Service Awards - none.
ITEM #4 - Introductions and Awards
A Citation of Appreciation was presented to Bruce Littler for service on the Marine Advisory Board.
ITEM #5 - Presentations - none.
ITEM #6 - Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 16, 1993
Commissioner Berfield indicated in the first paragraph on page 28, her reference was to 1 million tourists per year not $1 million. The minutes will be amended to reflect this change.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of September 16, 1993, as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM #7 - Public Hearings continued from previous meetings - none.
ITEM #8 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5481-93 - Vacating 6 foot drainage & utility easement lying in Lot 15, Tropic Hills Subdivision, Unit 2, Block E (Freeman V93-10)(PW)
The applicant has a pool and deck which encroach 6 feet into an existing 6 foot drainage and utility easement. The City has no existing utilities within this easement. The house and
a screened porch were built in 1963 and were permitted in the county. Tropic Hills Subdivision Units 1 through 4 were annexed on November 1, 1979.
This request has been reviewed by the various city departments and divisions concerned with vacations and there are no objections. The Engineering Department has no objection provided
a new 6 foot replacement easement is approved by the City and recorded by Pinellas County.
Florida Power has no objection provided the power pole located on the north side of the lot remains accessible to Florida Power Corporation. General Telephone and Vision Cable have
no objections to this vacation.
Public Works Director Bill Baker noted this item is associated with item 50(g), the replacement easement.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the vacation of the 6.0 foot drainage and utility easement for the subject property. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5481-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5481-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #9 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5472-93 - Vacating 5 foot sanitary sewer & utility easement lying along the westerly side of Lot 12 and in part of Lot 11, Carlouel Subdivision,
Block 266 (Athanasiou V93-11)(PW)
The applicant would like to erect a concrete wall within this easement along the rear of the property. The City has no existing utilities within this easement nor any future plans
for use of this easement.
This request has been reviewed by the various city departments and divisions concerned with vacations and there are no objections. Florida Power, General Telephone and Vision Cable
have no objections.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve the vacation of the 5 foot sanitary sewer and utility easement for the subject property.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5472-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5472-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #10 - Alcoholic Beverage Separation Distance Variance for property (Ruth Eckerd Hall) located at 1111 McMullen Booth Rd., Sec. 9-29-16, M&B 24.04 (PACT, Inc. AB93-11)(PLD)
This is a request for an alcoholic beverage separation distance variance to allow expansion of the service area for an existing 4-COP-X alcoholic beverage sales facility. The proposal
is to allow outdoor consumption of alcoholic beverages at the Ruth Eckerd Hall performing arts center 100 feet from a residential zone.
Staff finds this request meets the eight standards for variance approval (Section 45.24) if conditions established by the Planning and Zoning Board in granting the conditional use permit
associated with this request are followed.
There were no negative comments received from the Police Department or other city departments concerning this request.
On September 14, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board approved a conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1) the applicant shall obtain the requisite occupational
license within six months from the date of public hearing; 2) the applicant shall obtain the requisite alcoholic beverage separation distance variance from the Commission; and 3) outdoor
speakers shall not be used after 11:00 p.m. on any night.
Leonard Love, General Manager and Chief Financial Officer of PACT, said the request is for an expansion of their current license.
Commissioner Deegan asked if a separate occupational license is required and Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford responded their current license would require modification.
Commissioner Berfield questioned whether the nearby residents had been advised of the request as children may be disturbed due to the lateness of the hour to which the outdoor speakers
are allowed. Mr. Shuford indicated surrounding property owners had been notified and no objections were filed.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a variance of 200 feet to allow an alcoholic beverage use 100 feet from a residential zone for the subject property. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
ITEM #11 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #5448-93, #5449-93 & #5450-93 - Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Low Density Residential and RS-6 Zoning for property located at
2178 Burnice Dr., Glen Ellyn Estates, Lot 4, 0.24 acres m.o.l. (Gary Warner TRE A93-19, LUP93-25)(PLD)
The subject property is located on the north side of Burnice Drive, approximately 310 feet west of Belcher Road and 1,400 feet south of Druid Road. The applicant wishes to annex to
obtain city sewer service. The lots in Glen Ellyn Estates that are in the City have RS-6 Zoning. The Countywide Future Land Use Category for this subdivision is Residential Low, 5.0
u.p.a. maximum. It is proposed to assign a Future Land Use Category of Residential Low and RS-6 Zoning to the applicant's property. Ultimately, however, this property will be placed
in one of the proposed Residential Planned Development zoning districts to be developed as the Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) Consistency Program is completed.
Public Works has requested that the right-of-way of Burnice Drive in front of both the applicant's property and the adjacent lot to the east (Lot 3) also be annexed at this time. This
will place the right-of-way under the City's jurisdiction and enable the City to install a street light in this area.
On September 14, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board endorsed this request.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve annexation, a future land use plan amendment to Residential Low and RS-6 zoning for the subject property together with the right-of-way of Burnice
Drive abutting both Lots 3 and 4. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5448-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5448-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5449-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5449-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5450-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5450-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #12 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #5467-93, #5468-93 & #5469-93 - Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Industrial Limited and IL Zoning for property located at 2060-2066
Range Rd., NE 1/4 Sec. 12-29-15, Pinellas Groves Sub., part of Lot 11, 0.70 acres m.o.l. (Kehoe A93-20, LUP93-27)(PLD)
The subject property is located on the north side of Range Road, approximately 820 feet east of Hercules Avenue. The applicant wishes to annex to obtain city sewer service.
The property is developed with two existing buildings on its eastern portion, and a building and garage on the western portion.
On September 14, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board endorsed this request.
Commissioner Deegan moved to approve annexation, a future land use amendment to Industrial Limited and IL Zoning for the subject property. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5467-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass Ordinance #5467-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5468-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass Ordinance #5468-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
It was pointed out the legal description in Ordinance #5468-93 had been misread as Lot 1. The City Attorney responded this nullified the passage of the ordinance.
The City Attorney presented and reread the title of Ordinance #5468-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass Ordinance #5468-93 on first
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5469-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5469-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #13 - (Cont. from 9/2/93) Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #5445-93, #5446-93 & #5447-93 - Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Low Density Residential and RS-6 Zoning for
property located at 2345 Nursery Rd., SW 1/4 Sec. 19-29-16, Pinellas Groves Sub., part of Lot 19, 0.31 acres m.o.l. (Wagner A93-18, LUP93-24)(PLD)
The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Nursery Road and Excaliber Drive, approximately 1,770 feet east of Belcher Road. The applicants wish to annex to obtain city
sewer service for an existing single family residence.
The Countywide and City Future Land Use Plans show this parcel as Residential Suburban. The zoning classification for the adjacent subdivision (Premier Place) to the west and south
is RS-6. It is proposed to assign the property a Future Land Use Category of Residential Suburban and RS-6 Zoning. Ultimately, however, this property will be placed in one of the proposed
Residential Planned Development zoning districts to be developed as the Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) Consistency Program is completed.
It appears that not all of the abutting portion of Nursery Road has been previously annexed. Public Works recommends that the phrase, "together with the abutting right-of-way of Nursery
Road", be included in the legal description in the annexation, zoning and land use ordinances.
On August 17, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board endorsed this request for annexation, future land use plan amendment to Low Density Residential (Land Use Plan category at that time)
and RS-6 Zoning.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve annexation, a future land use plan amendment to Residential Suburban and RS-6 zoning for the subject property together
with the abutting right-of-way of Nursery Road. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5445-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass Ordinance #5445-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5446-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5446-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5447-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5447-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #14 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #5461-93 & #5462-93 - Land Use Plan Amendment & Zoning for property located at 601, 605 & 607 Orange Ave., Turner's Third Add., Blk 12,
Lot 4, Parcel A, LUP: Public/Semi-Public & RM-12 Zoning AND 604 & 606 Bay Ave., Turner's Third Add., Blk 12, part of Lots 1 & 2, Parcel B, LUP: Public/Semi-Public, OL Zoning, 0.50 acres
m.o.l. (Episcopal Church of the Ascension & Ruth Willett LUP93-26, Z93-10)(PLD)
Due to an advertising error, this item will need to be continued.
Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item to the October 21, 1993 meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #15 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #5465-93 & #5466-93 - Land Use Plan Amendment & Zoning for property located at 1260-1266 Bay Parkway, 300-322 Watkins Rd., 311 & 317 Pinellas
St., Westover Sub., Blk B, Lots 3-11, 15 & 16, Parcel A, LUP: to Institutional & Z: to Public/Semi-Public Planned Development District AND 1263 Waters Ave. and 301-309 Pinellas St.,
Westover Sub., Blk B, Lots 12-14 and Barnes Sub., Lot 4, Parcel B, Z: to Public/Semi-Public Planned Development District, 2.21 acres m.o.l. (Morton Plant Hospital Association, Inc./Leonard
& Gilotte LUP93-28, Z93-11)(PLD)
Due to the Planning and Zoning Board continuing this item, the Commission will need to do so as well.
Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item to the October 21, 1993 meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #16 - Approval of Downtown Development Plan & Periphery Area Plan - Second Reading of the following Ordinances - Ords. #5297-92, #5298-92, #5299-92 & #5300-92 as amended, amending
future land use map from various classifications to Central Business District; Ord. #5301-92 - amending zoning atlas from various classifications to Urban Center (Transition); Ord. #5302-92
- amending zoning atlas from various classifications to Urban Center (Transition); Ord. #5303-92 - amending zoning atlas from various classifications to Urban Center (Eastern Corridor);
Ord. #5304-92 - amending zoning atlas from Public/Semi-Public to Urban Center (Bayfront); Ord. #5305-92 - amending zoning atlas from Public/Semi-Public to Urban Center (Core); & Ord.
#5235-92, as amended, amending various sections of the Land Development Code concerning the Urban Center zoning district (PLD)
On February 4, 1993, the Commission gave preliminary approval to the Downtown Development Plan (Community Redevelopment Area Plan) and passed several associated ordinances on first
reading. On August 16, 1993, the Commission confirmed that it desired to proceed with the Plan with incremental changes necessitated by changing conditions since first ordinance reading.
Staff revised the Plan according to this direction and major substantive changes are listed below:
The measures of success section (page 7) has been revised to reflect: specific retail/entertainment floor area increases anticipated between 1993 and 1998 and; to revised the references
to 1992 to 1993
Figure 4, Drew Street realignment options, is deleted since development of this figure is dependent upon consideration of the entire Drew Street improvement project.
The discussion of the Special Transportation Area (STA) (pages 15 & 16) and Figure 6 illustrating the proposed STA have been deleted. The recent ELMS III legislation effectively did
away with the STA approach and substituted a relaxation of concurrency requirements in redevelopment areas. Staff anticipates modifying the Comprehensive Plan in 1994 to revise City
concurrency requirements for transportation consistent with the intent of the ELMS III legislation which is to provide a relaxation of transportation concurrency requirements in highly
urbanized areas.
On page 18, under design issues, the paragraph suggesting the Maas Brothers building should be removed has been deleted. Also on this page, under assembly possibilities, the sentence
referring to public land uses on the bluff which do not take advantage of harbor views has also been deleted.
On page 21, under both design issues and zoning issues, language has been added to reflect the possibility of a "Main Street" design approach being included in the Urban Center (Core)
Subdistrict.
The entire addendum to the Plan has been deleted and replaced by the Periphery Area
Plan. This change allows the land use and zoning changes associated with the plan to be considered on a separate track from the Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) Plan (i.e. the Downtown
Development Plan).
Appendix B, which provides a summary of previous Downtown Development Plans, has been deleted due to its length. It simply did not make sense for staff to include this lengthy appendix
in a document considerably shortened by other proposed changes.
On page 69, Appendix C, implementation schedule, changes have been made to several implementation activities to reflect the current time table.
Appendix D, beginning on page 71, has been modified to provide additional detail regarding possible use of CRA funds.
Appendices E, F and G have been added to illustrate proposed parking garage regulations, establish a relocation policy and provide a legal description for the Downtown CRA, respectively.
The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) reviewed the plan and the following changes have been made based on its direction: 1) on page 21, the words "strongly encouraged" have been
added in the last paragraph to revise the Commission's approach to parking garages; 2) on page 71, this page has been reworded to reflect the changes requested by the CRA. Specifically,
the six projects approved on September 16, 1993 have been added, and the landscaping and park development proposals have been "downplayed."; 3) on page 72, provided simply because of
changes to page 71; 4) on page 74, this page was revised to reflect the addition of 1992 and partial 1993 information. Since not all of the 1993 information is available at this time,
the rows have not been totaled in this table; 5) Appendix E, the draft parking garage ordinance, was deleted; 6) on page 76, Appendix "E" has been renumbered due to deletion of former
Appendix E; and 7) on page 77, Appendix "F" has been renumbered due to deletion of former Appendix E.
In addition to the Downtown Development Plan and Periphery Area Plan, there are associated Land Use Plan, Zoning and Land Development Code amendments. The zoning amendments involve
only two relatively small areas which would receive either Urban Center (Transition) or Urban Center (Eastern Corridor) zoning classifications. These are the northeast and southeast
expansion described in the Periphery Area Plan, respectively.
The Land Use Plan amendments associated with the project involve the four expansions listed in the Periphery Area Plan. These areas are proposed to receive a Downtown Development District
Land Use Plan classification, the same Land Use Plan classification that the CRA portion of the downtown is classified. Ultimately, the proposed Downtown/Mixed Use zoning district would
be applied to these areas. In the interim, any City zoning district could be included within this Land Use Plan classification.
Motions to amend the Land Use Plan amendment ordinances are needed only to change the name of the Land Use Plan classification from Downtown Development District to
Central Business District, consistent with the Pinellas Planning Council and new City nomenclature.
Finally, there is a Land Development Code amendment associated with the Downtown Development Plan, this amendment is a substantial revision to the Urban Center zoning district requirements.
The intent of these changes to the Land Development Code is to bring the Urban Center zoning district into closer compliance with the requirements of the Downtown Development Plan.
Major features include expansion of the conditional use section to reduce the "anything goes" use categories currently in place, creation of a new Urban Center (Transition) subdistrict,
and modification to some dimensional and numerical requirements for the Downtown (such as setbacks and amenity area requirements).
Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford reviewed the changes to the plan based on Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) direction and the actions to be taken. He indicated four areas
had been proposed for expansion with none being added to the CRA district but added to the urban center district. Mr. Shuford said no action regarding the performance zoning for the
periphery area would be required tonight. If the land use plan changes are approved for the outside area they will go to the Pinellas Planning Council for their review.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the revised Downtown Development Plan and the Periphery Area Plan. The motion was duly seconded.
Commissioner Deegan asked at what point this becomes the revised CRA plan. Mr. Shuford indicated it would need county approval and staff will be submitting it to them as soon as possible.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Thomas moved to amend Ordinance #5297-92, in the title, beginning in the third to the last line, delete "Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center" and insert
"Central Business District"; and in Section 1, after "To:", change Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center to read Central Business District. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5297-92 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5297-92 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Commissioner Deegan moved to amend Ordinance #5298-92, in the title, in the second to the last line, delete "Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center" and insert "Central
Business District"; and in Section 1, after "To:", change Downtown Development
District/Regional Activity Center to read Central Business District. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5298-92 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5298-92 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Commissioner Berfield moved to amend Ordinance #5299-92, in the title, beginning in the third to the last line, delete "Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center" and insert
"Central Business District"; and in Section 1, after "To:", change Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center to read Central Business District. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5299-92 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5299-92 as amended
on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to amend Ordinance #5300-92, in the title, beginning in the third to the last line, delete "Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center" and
insert "Central Business District"; and in Section 1, after "To:", change Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center to read Central Business District. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5300-92 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5300-92 as amended
on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5301-92 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5301-92 on second and final reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Commissioner Deegan moved to amend Ordinance #5302-92, in the title, beginning in the third to the last line, delete "Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center" and insert
"Central Business District"; and in Section 1, after "To:", change Downtown Development District/Regional Activity Center to read Central Business District. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5302-92 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5302-92 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5303-92 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5303-92 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5304-92 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5304-92 on second and final reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5305-92 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5305-92 on second and final reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Commissioner Thomas moved to amend Ordinance #5235-92, in the title, insert "PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION;" before "PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE." and on page 21, add a new Section 7 to
read:
Section 7. This ordinance shall be codified in the Clearwater Code of Ordinances as adopted on February 4, 1993. The City Commission acknowledges that the provisions of the Land Development
Code amended by this ordinance have been recodified and renumbered since the first reading of this ordinance on February 4, 1993. The code publisher, Municipal Code Corporation, is
authorized and directed to incorporate the amendments and new provisions adopted herein into the current text of the Clearwater Code of Ordinance utilizing the following tracing table:
Old or Added Sections Current or New Sections
135.138 40.481
135.139 40.482
135.140 40.483
135.141 40.484
135.142 40.485
135.143 40.486
135.144 40.487
135.145 40.488
135.146 40.489
135.1461 - added 40.490 - new
136.022 42.34
136.025 41.053
137.005 35.11
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5235-92 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5235-92 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #17 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5460-93 - LDCA amending Secs. 44.08 & 44.54, to allow temporary signs under certain circumstances (PLD)
The Commission has requested a revision of the sign regulations to provide for temporary signs for new businesses and for businesses having their signs damaged in isolated storm events
or through acts of vandalism.
Ordinance #5460-93 has been prepared to address the Commission's concerns through the following added signage allowances:
New Businesses would be allowed the following signs for up to 90 days after opening:
One 32 sq.ft. freestanding banner, or a banner or banners attached to existing sign face or faces, not exceeding the size of the sign face or faces; OR
Up to 20 small balloons or one large, 20 foot diameter balloon; OR
Window signs up to 40% of window area or 64 sq.ft., whichever is less.
Businesses Having Name Changes would be allowed the following signs for up to 30 days after opening:
One 32 sq.ft. freestanding banner, or a banner or banners attached to existing sign face or faces, not exceeding the size of the sign face or faces; OR
Up to 20 small balloons or one large, 20 foot diameter balloon; OR
Window signs up to 40% of window area of 64 sq.ft., whichever is less.
Businesses Suffering Isolated Storm Damage would be allowed the following signs for up to 30 days:
One 32 sq.ft. freestanding banner, or a banner or banners attached to existing sign face or faces, not exceeding the size of the sign face or faces; OR
Window signs up to 40% of window area or 64 sq.ft., whichever is less.
On September 14, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of this amendment subject to the deletion of the allowance for balloons as temporary signage.
On September 23, 1993, the Development Code Adjustment Board recommended the Commission adopt the proposed ordinance subject to: deletion of the allowance for small balloons under
any circumstances (the Board had no problem with the large balloon allowance); and a provision be added that any banner or balloon erected under the ordinance that is not well maintained
shall be subject to removal by city staff. The Board was concerned about the environmental impact of small balloons as they affect turtles, birds and other sea life.
The temporary sign ordinance was discussed by the Code Enforcement Task Force. By a 4-2 vote, the Task Force recommended approval of the ordinance subject to the following: (1) reduction
of the 90-day allowance for new businesses to 30 days; (2) deletion of the provision for small balloons; (3) allowance of the cold air balloon for a three day period only; and (4) addition
of language that would permit the location of the temporary signage only in areas where there were no safety problems created.
Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford reviewed the recommendations by the boards.
Mayor Garvey supported the recommendation for prohibition on small balloons.
Commissioner Thomas felt attention should be given to getting new businesses off the ground. He said three days would not be sufficient time to catch the population's attention in
order to succeed. He said he did not object to switching from small balloons to pennants. He found 90 days to be too long a time period and supported 30 days for temporary signs.
Commissioner Fitzgerald felt 30 days would be appropriate. He supported a prohibition on small balloons citing wildlife concerns. He questioned how the City's ordinance regarding
balloons compared to the county's and Mr. Shuford responded regulation of temporary signs are left to the individual municipalities. Commissioner Fitzgerald supported the Code Enforcement
Task Force's recommendation of allowing three days for the display of cold air balloons.
Commissioner Berfield moved to amend Ordinance 5460-93 on page 2, Section 6(b)(2) to read "Not more than a single cold air balloon of not more than 20 feet in diameter;". The motion
was duly seconded.
Commissioner Thomas pointed out this amendment did not address allowing pennants in place of small balloons.
There was discussion regarding the number, size and length of the pennants if allowed.
Commissioner Berfield withdrew her motion and the seconder withdrew his second.
Mayor Garvey said she was not in favor of a business displaying more than one cold air balloon.
Commissioner Berfield asked if a motion is necessary since the ordinance already specifies a single cold air balloon and the City Attorney responded Commission consensus was sufficient.
Commissioner Thomas supported a 30-day time frame for cold air balloons in order for new businesses to create an identity. Mayor Garvey supported a 7-day time frame. Commissioner
Berfield suggested two weeks and Commissioner Deegan agreed two weeks was reasonable.
Majority consensus was to limit the display of cold air balloons to 14 days.
The City Manager felt a better measure than "in diameter" was necessary for describing the size of cold air balloons. Mr. Shuford offered the measurement of 20 feet in any one direction.
There was general agreement with this method of measurement. It was also generally agreed that placement of the cold air balloons should be in compliance with safety considerations
such as visual obstruction and fire lanes.
Mayor Garvey asked the Commission's feelings regarding displaying small balloons. Consensus was there be a prohibition on small balloons.
The Mayor questioned if the Commission wished to consider allowing pennants.
Questions were raised regarding the definition of "pennant" and what size pennant would be reasonable. A question regarding how long banners should be allowed to be displayed at new
business locations was raised. Majority consensus was to set a 30-day time frame for display of banners at new business locations.
A question was raised regarding the time frame for window signs and Commissioner Deegan requested on page 3 of Ordinance #5460-93, Section 7(a)(1), at the end of the sentence, the word
"and" be changed to "or." Commissioner Thomas supported using "and."
Majority consensus was to change "and" to "or".
Discussion returned to pennants. Mr. Shuford read the code definition of "pennants" to be a string of pennants. Commissioner Thomas asked if a string of pennants would be in violation
of the code if used to identify a restaurant celebrating an anniversary. Mr. Shuford said it would depend on whether they were considered to be flags. Mr. Shuford said there is currently
a broad interpretation of what is considered to be a "flag."
Mayor Garvey asked direction from the Commission regarding "pennants." Commissioner Deegan supported pennants if used separately and not in addition to other temporary signs. Commissioner
Berfield said she would probably support them if defined. Commissioner Thomas suggested allowing an one hundred foot string of pennants.
Consensus was for staff to develop a definition and regulations of pennants to bring this back for Commission approval.
Commissioner Deegan referred to Sec. 44.54(5)(a) of the ordinance and requested the City Manager rather than the City Commission be authorized to designate the adversely affected area
upon which a sign is to be erected in case of an emergency or disaster. The ordinance will be revised to reflect this change.
In response to a question, it was indicated any combination of temporary signage can be used as long as their display does not exceed the 30-day time frame, and as long as only one
type is used at any one time.
Cynthia Egbert considered address numbers to be even more important now that signs are being reduced to comply with the sign code and asked that consideration be given to enforcement.
She cited safety concerns in trying to locate properties that were not readily identified by address numbers.
Robert Clark said capitalism and common sense do not mix and felt a stringent feasibility study should be required.
Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item to the November 8, 1993, Commission meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Thomas requested staff review and bring forward the code section relating to address numbers. Mayor Garvey pointed out the sign code does say address numbers should be
listed. Commissioner Deegan indicated the Code Enforcement Task Force is reviewing this issue.
ITEM #18 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5463-93 - LDCA amending Sec. 42.21, to revise the requirements for nonconforming uses on barrier islands to encourage compliance with
development and building regulations including flood damage prevention regulations (PLD)
The Commission, responding to the Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force report, requested staff investigate ways in which density or use intensity incentives could be provided to
promote redevelopment in conformity with City code requirements. Staff initially proposed a comprehensive plan amendment allowing density increases on the barrier island if there was
complete compliance with flood hazard prevention regulations, and contingent upon safe hurricane evacuation times being maintained and concurrency regulations being met.
The State Department of Community Affairs (DCA) rejected this amendment, but did advise staff that local governments were free to deal with issues involving existing densities and intensities
of use. That is, the State allows the City to maintain existing densities but the City can not increase them.
Following this suggestion, staff prepared Ordinance #5463-93. If adopted, this ordinance would allow property owners who are voluntarily repairing or reconstructing their buildings
to retain existing nonconforming densities or intensities of use so long as they meet all other City development requirements (such as setbacks, open space, landscaping, flood hazard
prevention, and building code requirements).
Staff feels adoption of this ordinance would provide a limited incentive for bringing properties into compliance with City development regulations (other than density or intensity of
use requirements). There will be no conflicts with Countywide Plan (PPC) use intensity rules since local governments are allowed to address nonconformities completely at their own discretion.
Both the Planning and Zoning Board and the Development Code Adjustment Board recommend approval of this ordinance.
Mayor Garvey questioned if all other development requirements would have to be met and whether density could still be lost. It was indicated density could be lost due to site constraints
and/or design. All other requirements would have to be met.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a Land Development Code Amendment amending Section 42.21, to revise the requirements for nonconforming uses on barrier islands
to encourage compliance with development and building regulations including flood damage prevention regulations. The motion was duly seconded.
In response to Commissioner Deegan's questions, Mr. Shuford said this amendment would apply to those owners who are voluntarily repairing or reconstructing their buildings and this
is already allowed in case of disaster.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5463-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass Ordinance #5463-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #19 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5464-93 - LDCA amending Secs. 40.164, 40.184, 40.204, & 40.224, to provide for nursing homes as a conditional use in the RM 16, 20, 24
& 28 zoning districts; amending Sec. 41.053 to provide supplementary conditional use standards for such uses (PLD)
In working with the PPC Consistency Program, staff found that many communities permit nursing homes in their medium and high density land use plan categories. Given the potential impacts
of such uses, they seem to be quite compatible with these zoning districts. Consequently, staff would recommend they be included as a conditional use in the RM-16, RM-20, RM-24 and
RM-28 zoning districts. Nursing homes are limited to the "residential equivalent" of 15 dwelling units per acre; this translates to a maximum of 30 beds per acre at 2 beds per dwelling
unit.
At their meeting of September 14, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of this amendment.
Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford pointed out conditional use approval would be required for nursing homes in multi-family residential districts.
Commissioner Thomas questioned whether this amendment will allow small condominium buildings to be converted into nursing homes. Mr. Shuford responded it will be possible to convert
them; however, it will probably be cost prohibitive.
Mayor Garvey said state laws regulate nursing homes. Mr. Shuford indicated it would be very difficult to convert them.
Commissioner Deegan questioned if these types of facilities would require more parking than condominium facilities and Mr. Shuford indicated they would require less.
Mayor Garvey pointed out a conditional use would be necessary and the board that approves these uses would determine if a nursing home is appropriate.
Commissioner Thomas felt condominium owners should know a nursing home is a possibility. The City Manager said the conversion of a condo facility would require the approval of all
the owners. Mr. Shuford said a conditional use application would require notification of all surrounding property owners. He discussed the parking requirements for a nursing home indicating
one space is required for every two beds.
Commissioner Thomas felt this amendment could have a dramatic impact on the citizens of Clearwater.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a Land Development Code Amendment amending Sections 40.164, 40.184, 40.204, and 40.224, to provide for nursing homes as a conditional use in the
RM 16, 20, 24 and 28 zoning districts; amending Section 41.053 to provide supplementary conditional use standards for such uses. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5464-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass Ordinance #5464-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Public Hearing - Second Reading Ordinances
ITEM #20 - Public Hearings/Second Reading Ordinances continued from previous meetings - None.
ITEM #21 - Ord. #5389-93 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Commercial General for property located at 801, 803 & 805 Turner St., Magnolia Park Sub., Blk 22, N 125 feet of Lots 1 & 2 and Lot
3, approx. 0.53 acres (Newport Oil Corp. LUP93-11)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5389-93 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5389-93 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #22 - Ord. #5390-93 - CN Zoning for property located at 801, 803 & 805 Turner St., Magnolia Park Sub., Blk 22, N 125 feet of Lots 1 & 2 and Lot 3, approx. 0.53 acres (Newport Oil
Corp. Z93-06)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5390-93 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5390-93 on second and final reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #23 - Ord. #5405-93 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Industrial for property located along north right-of-way line of Seaboard Coast Railroad, Sec. 1-29-15, M&B 34.27 and part of M&B
34.35 and Sec. 12-29-15, part of M&B 21.01 (Instrument Transformers LUP93-08)
Commissioner Deegan moved to amend Ordinance #5405-93, in the last line of the title, change "INDUSTRIAL" to read "INDUSTRIAL GENERAL."; in Section 1, after "To:", change "Industrial"
to read "Industrial General."; and in Section 3, delete ", and subject to the approval of the land use designation by the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners. The Director
of Planning and Development is authorized to transmit to the Pinellas County Planning Council an application to amend the Countywide Plan in order to achieve consistency with the Future
Land Use Plan Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan as amended by this ordinance". The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5405-93 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5405-93 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #24 - Ord. #5406-93 - IL Zoning for property located along north right-of-way line of Seaboard Coast Railroad, Sec. 1-29-15, M&B 34.27 and part of M&B 34.35 and Sec. 12-29-15, part
of M&B 21.01 (Instrument Transformers A93-06)
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to amend Ordinance #5406-93, in Section 4, delete ", and subject to approval of the land use category set forth in Ordinance No. 5405-93, by the Pinellas
County Board of County Commissioners". The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5406-93 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5406-93 as amended
on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #25 - Ord. #5408-93 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Commercial/Tourist Facilities for property located at 2633 Harbor Circle, Hill-Top Subdivision, Lots 8 & 9 (McNeill LUP93-14)
Commissioner Thomas moved to amend Ordinance #5408-93, in the title, in the next to the last line, change "COMMERCIAL/TOURIST FACILITIES" to read "RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE/RETAIL."; in Section
1, after "To:", change "Commercial/Tourist Facilities" to read "Residential/Office/Retail."; and in Section 3, delete ", and subject to the approval of the land use designation by the
Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners. The Director of Planning and Development is authorized to transmit to the Pinellas County Planning Council an application to amend the
Countywide Plan in order to achieve consistency with the Future Land Use Plan Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan as amended by this ordinance". The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5408-93 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5408-93 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #26 - Ord. #5409-93 - CG Zoning for property located at 2633 Harbor Circle, Hill-Top Subdivision, Lots 8 & 9 (McNeill A93-09)
Commissioner Berfield moved to amend Ordinance #5409-93, in Section 4, delete ", and subject to approval of the land use category set forth in Ordinance No. 5408-93, by the Pinellas
County Board of County Commissioners". The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5409-93 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5409-93 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #27 - Ord. #5439-93 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Industrial for property located South of Calumet St. & West of Hercules Ave., Sec. 1-29-15, M&B 34.311 (Instrument Transformers
LUP93-22)
Commissioner Thomas moved to amend Ordinance #5439-93, in the title, in the next to the last line, change "INDUSTRIAL" to read "INDUSTRIAL GENERAL FOR PARCEL A" AND "INDUSTRIAL LIMITED
FOR PARCEL B".; in Section 1, after "To:", change "Industrial" to read: "Industrial General - Parcel A Industrial Limited - Parcel B"; and a revised Exhibit A. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5439-93 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5439-93 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #28 - Ord. #5440-93 - IL Zoning for property located South of Calumet St. & West of Hercules Ave., Sec. 1-29-15, M&B 34.311 (Instrument Transformers A93-16)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5440-93 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5440-93 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #29 - Ord. #5459-93 - Relating to special assessments; amending Secs. 27.01 thru 27.13, to provide for special assessments based upon area, value or other reasonable bases to fund
public works projects specially benefitting property, defining terms, revising notice and hearing requirements
The City Clerk pointed out the city engineer has always advertised construction bids and asked that the ordinance be amended to reflect this.
Commissioner Berfield moved to amend Ordinance #5459-93 on page 3, Sec. 27.03, subsection (2), first sentence, change the word "clerk" to "engineer." The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5459-93 as amended for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5459-93 as amended on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #30 - Ord. #5477-93 - CG Zoning for property located at 608 & 610 N. Garden Ave., G.L. Bidwell's Oakwood Addition to Clearwater, Lots 25 & 26, 0.32 acres m.o.l. (CNHS, Inc. Z93-07)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5477-93 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5477-93 on second and final reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #31 - Ord. #5479-93 - 1992/93 Third Quarter operating budget
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5479-93 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5479-93 on second and final reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #32 - Ord. #5480-93 - 1992/93 Third Quarter Capital Improvement Project budget
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5480-93 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5480-93 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
The meeting recessed from 7:59 p.m. to 8:11 p.m.
ITEM #33 - Special presentations of widespread public interest
a) McMullen Booth & Marlo Drive
Traffic Engineer Peter Yauch reported with the opening of the Bayside Bridge, traffic on McMullen-Booth Road has increased significantly. The added volumes have overloaded the two
lane section of McMullen-Booth to the north of Sunset Point Road. Several complaints have been received from the residents of the Country Villas South Subdivision (aka Shady Oak Farms)
which is accessible only by the Marlo Drive/McMullen Booth Road intersection. Mr. Yauch reported during the morning peak hours traffic on the two lane section is stop and go for vehicles
going south and the same for north bound traffic in the afternoon peak hours.
He said the "Do Not Block Intersection" signs installed by the County have not been effective. Signal installation is not warranted due to the volume of side street traffic and accident
records being low. Studies were conducted regarding delays when turning left out of the subdivision where traffic was observed for a 5-hour period. The average wait for a left hand
turn was one minute with the longest wait being four minutes. Mr. Yauch said the City and County have worked closely with the residents and the County has installed large warning signs
at each end of the two lane section of McMullen-Booth Road. Construction flashing lights will be added to the signs when construction work begins in 15-45 days. The construction speed
limit will be set at approximately 35 mph. Florida Power has been asked to add an additional street light at the intersection of Marlo Boulevard and McMullen-Booth Road and additional
police enforcement has been requested in this area.
In response to a question from the City Manager, Mr. Yauch said jurisdiction over the intersection is shared. Marlo Drive is in the City of Clearwater, McMullen-Booth Road is a Pinellas
County road and Weatherstone Drive, which forms the east leg of the intersection, is in Safety Harbor.
Mr. Yauch has looked at three possible back exits. One runs through parkland. This land was purchased with a matching grant and to construct a roadway on this land would require a
"conversion request" with approval from the National Park Service. A chain link fence denies access to Marlo Drive from the parkland.
Several of the residents of Countrypark Subdivision have been in contact with the Parks & Recreation Department expressing concerns about the future of the parkland. The Parks & Recreation
Department have promised the access road would remain a non-public service road.
Another alternative is to follow the Landmark Drive corridor. Environmental permits have been issued for the construction of Landmark Drive extension and the construction plans were
about 70% complete when funding for the project was removed from the capital improvements program due to a school, the impetus for the extension, not being constructed. Drainage along
the corridor is a concern and construction of a temporary facility would require a modification to the permit process.
A connection to Saber Drive would require additional drainage requirements. This connection would take approximately a year to complete the plans, go through reviews, bid and construct.
Residents of the Countrypark Subdivision had petitioned the City to not connect Saber Drive to Landmark Drive when it was extended to the south of Enterprise Road and the City agreed.
Mr. Yauch pointed out all three alternatives have major obstacles and indicated completion of McMullen-Booth Road would resolve the congestion problem being faced by the residents.
In response to Commissioner Thomas' question, Mr. Yauch said the volumes of traffic do not justify the installation a traffic signal. This would also require Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) approval.
Commissioner Fitzgerald felt not allowing right turns on red at the intersection of McMullen-Booth and Enterprise Roads would help to create gaps in the traffic and would help to alleviate
some of the traffic congestion. Mr. Yauch said staff is working with the County on this solution.
In response to Commissioner Thomas' question, Public Works Director Bill Baker indicated if Landmark Drive is built all the way to Enterprise Road it would take longer than 15 months.
He said dealing with the wetlands will be difficult due to environmental concerns. He felt an approved plan would cost approximately $500,000. He stated even a modified or temporary
plan would have to fully address the wetlands.
In response to Commissioner Fitzgerald's question, Mr. Baker said the City has the environmental permits to construct a multi-lane Landmark Drive from Enterprise Road to Union Avenue
and to shorten this road from Enterprise Road to Marlo Boulevard would require an amended permit. He said the permits are good for five years and the City has just obtained them.
In response to Commissioner Thomas' question, the City Manager said several years ago a decision was made to extend Landmark Drive from Enterprise Road down to Union Street primarily
to accommodate the construction of a school. There was Commission consensus at that time not to connect to Saber Drive. When the school board decided not to build, the money for the
Landmark project was moved to 1999. He said this project may be eliminated if it is proven McMullen-Booth Road can handle the traffic.
Commissioner Thomas asked when McMullen-Booth Road is completed will this solve the problem. Mr. Yauch indicated there will be more gaps in traffic; however, there will be a speed
concern.
Wayne Eichelberger challenged the 5-hour traffic study done by staff indicating it was not done during typical circumstances. He said access used to be a problem only during peak hours;
however, now it is a continuous problem. He felt in the long run having a back exit would be a safety factor. He indicated his subdivision demands very little of the City.
Jerry Monnihan cited safety concerns in trying to exit to go to Countryside High School. He pointed out his development backs up to Countrypark Subdivision. He indicated it is difficult
for emergency vehicles to get into the development. He said construction will take approximately two years and requested at least a one-way back exit.
Mayor Garvey asked staff if anyone has been in contact with Countrypark to see if they would be amenable to connecting the roads.
Judy Troutman said she has asked for help previously, citing safety concerns for the school children and the walkers. She said in September she had an accident trying to turn left
into the subdivision. Ms. Troutman did not agree with the accident figures presented by staff.
She questioned what other neighborhoods in Clearwater consisting of 110 homes do not have two entrances. She said this morning she waited six minutes to turn left to go to Countryside
High School. She indicated one reason for the low volume count is people are staying home. She said weekends are becoming intolerable. She requested a traffic light be installed.
John Kashinski said the traffic complaints on McMullen-Booth Road started six years ago. He said there is a need to correct what has been neglected in the past. He found it imperative
to get another exit especially for emergency situations. He suggested a dividing line at the entrance/exit to direct right and left turns. He said since extending Landmark Drive has
been permitted the City should get on with it.
Richard Theriault said he has a file of letters going back 13 years in which there have been promises for the paving of Landmark Drive. He said this was on the plans when he purchased
his house. He cited safety concerns regarding emergency vehicles. He felt Landmark Drive should be completed. He said McMullen-Booth Road is on its way to becoming the Pasco to St.
Petersburg throughway. He said a back exit is needed.
Robert Clark said there are ordinances that require emergency vehicle access and in the event of an emergency the City will be in a position of liability. Without a back entrance he
said the City is being exposed to a lawsuit. He felt this was a special situation and there should be some sort of a safety valve to solve this problem.
Commissioner Berfield questioned whether the McMullen-Booth Road entrance could be closed off if Landmark Drive is completed and "No Throughway" signs be installed. It was pointed
out this would still only give one exit. Commissioner Berfield expressed concern if the other exit is left open there would be cut through traffic problems.
Mayor Garvey said the question is whether to do all of Landmark Drive or whether Countrypark would consider a connection. Commissioner Berfield felt the residents needed to know that
if a second access is provided there will be cut-through traffic in the subdivision.
Commissioner Thomas felt if the road is put through between McMullen-Booth to Landmark Drive, there will be massive traffic and the subdivision would be tremendously impacted. He felt
a solution might be to install a stop light. Mr. Yauch said the side street traffic volume is so low it does not meet the standards for a signal. Also, installation of a traffic light
would have to go to the MPO for approval. Commissioner Berfield asked if there was some sort of temporary allowance to install a light due to safety concerns.
There was discussion regarding the criteria that would warrant installation of a traffic light. Commissioner Thomas pointed out Rutenberg bought a traffic light when he built his bank
building many years ago and questioned if this is still possible. Mr. Yauch said congestion concerns have prompted the MPO to look at all signals to be installed on major corridors
and to remove unwarranted signals. The City Manager said both the County and the MPO would have to approve a traffic signal.
Commissioner Thomas asked how the traffic on Belcher Road compared to that on
McMullen-Booth Road and Mr. Yauch indicated approximately 25,000 vehicles a day travel on Belcher and felt McMullen-Booth Road traffic will probably be double of that.
Commissioner Fitzgerald said he realizes that cutting into a back road creates a potential for a racetrack and asked if any consideration has been given to connecting to Hill Creek
Circle. Mr. Yauch indicated privately owned land currently blocks access to that street.
Commissioner Thomas asked if the parkland can temporarily be made into a one-lane street. Parks & Recreation Director Ream Wilson said the Department of Natural Resources will not
allow a temporary conversion. He said there have been numerous phone calls and letters from the residents in Countrypark and they are opposed to traffic on that roadway. The City Manager
felt Countrypark would be opposed to any connection.
Commissioner Thomas asked if a road is done on the back entrance and all of a sudden a race track has been created how would the residents react.
In response to Commissioner Thomas' question, Richard Theriault said there is a risk of creating a race track. He said if this happens, stop signs and speed bumps could be installed
to control the situation. Mr. Baker said speed bumps are not acceptable on public roads. Mr. Theriault questioned whether the residents of Countrypark have the right to forbid the
public from using public roads.
Wayne Eichelberger suggested making the back entrance one-way out.
Jan Paddock expressed concern regarding 25 mph and 45 mph speed limit signs on McMullen-Booth Road being posted very closely together.
Mr. Baker pointed out that Ashland Heights Subdivision had two entrances and the residents wanted to close one off due to the cut through traffic.
Barbara Theriault pointed out the traffic study done by staff was made at the lowest traffic period of the year and found it to be inaccurate. She felt stop signs at each corner may
help. She said they had been promised a back exit since 1980 and said they were as important as the residents of Countrypark.
Commissioner Thomas said using the worst case scenario and the traffic is doubled on McMullen-Booth Road would there be a recommendation to build the Landmark Drive Extension to Enterprise
Road. Mr. Yauch did not believe when McMullen-Booth Road is completed there would be a major problem accessing subdivisions. Commissioner Thomas asked if computer modeling could be
done to determine worst case scenarios and whether construction of Landmark Drive would be warranted. Mr. Yauch said he could probably get some estimated delays and projected volumes
on McMullen-Booth Road.
Commissioner Berfield asked if there are plans to build a school and if Landmark Drive will have to be extended. The City Manager said there has been discussion regarding building
the school at some point and access will be needed.
Commissioner Berfield questioned access to the park and Mr. Wilson indicated this is the reason the park has not been developed. He said the only access at this time would be through
the subdivision from McMullen-Booth Road. He indicated putting in Landmark Drive would allow the park to be developed.
Commissioner Deegan asked if the guidelines would be any less stringent for a temporary light during the construction period of McMullen-Booth Road. Mr. Yauch indicated one would be
installed only if warranted. He felt it would provide a gap in traffic but would increase the congestion further up on McMullen-Booth Road. Commissioner Deegan requested those in the
audience, regarding this item, that were in favor of a traffic signal at the intersection of Marlo Drive and McMullen-Booth Road to raise their hands. No count was taken but it appeared
most were in favor of a light.
Commissioner Berfield asked how Mease Hospital obtained their light and Mr. Yauch said he was not familiar that history.
Commissioner Thomas moved that the City of Clearwater request the MPO and Pinellas County to install an emergency temporary traffic light at the intersection of McMullen-Booth Road
and Marlo Drive until the construction is completed for the widening of McMullen-Booth Road. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Thomas moved to request the appropriate action be taken to implement a "No Right Turn" restriction for eastbound traffic at the Enterprise/McMullen-Booth Roads intersection.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Berfield requested staff get with the Countrypark homeowners to explore all options for a second exit out of Country Villas Subdivision.
Commissioner Thomas requested computer modeling using worst case scenarios on McMullen-Booth Road to project future problems.
ITEM #34 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Agenda
Richard Haworth, Public Affairs Director for the Church of Scientology, stated he found out a week ago that an international Scientology event had been moved to Friday, October 8, 1993.
He reported the response to this event has been greater than anticipated and they have approached the State Department of Transportation to request closure of Ft. Harrison Avenue for
the safety of individuals crossing the street at the Ft. Harrison Hotel. FDOT requires approval of the local governing body. He indicated he has been working with the Police Department
and requested Commission approval of the closure from 8:00 p.m., Friday until 1:00 a.m., Saturday morning.
The Mayor questioned if the Scientologists would be paying all the cost of the Police. Mr. Haworth stated they are paying for off-duty police officers and for the barricades.
Commissioner Thomas questioned whether this was the number of officers the Police Department said were necessary. Mr Haworth indicated this is the number given to him by Lt. Hardman.
Commissioner Thomas questioned if this was standard procedure and it was indicated the Commission has approved street closures for special events.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the closure of South Fort Harrison as requested provided the Scientologists provide adequate police coverage as determined by the Police Department.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
William Wallace complained regarding the notification process for vacation of right-of-way applications. He requested posting of the property and/or notification of property owners
within a 200' radius. The City Manager pointed out a distinction will need to be made between vacations of rights-of-way and other easements. Consensus of the Commission was for rights-of-way
proposed for vacation be posted.
Bob Wright complained that no provision has been made at Monday Commission meetings for Citizens to be Heard on Items not on the Agenda or public input on agenda items. The Mayor pointed
out citizens are welcome to speak on items on the agenda. Commissioner Thomas stated consideration could be given for "Citizens to be Heard" at Monday meetings when the Commission discusses
its rules.
Robert Clark complained regarding profits made from war. He felt gun owners should be licensed.
Steve Saliga complained regarding cable rate increases and asked that "basic" service be defined. He questioned if the cable company can bill its subscribers for something not approved
by Commission. It was pointed out the City has made application to set their own rates.
Robert Harn read into the record a letter regarding the history of Plaza Park and expressed his opposition to the name of Plaza Park being changed.
Mayor Garvey invited the public to the Third Annual City Expo at Clearwater Mall, Friday, October 8, 1993, from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
ITEM #35 - Items continued from previous meetings - None.
ITEM #36 - Marina Slip Rent increases, to be effective 11/1/93, Transient Vessels slip by 5 cents, Private Pleasure Craft slip to $3.50 per foot per month for Clearwater residents &
to $4 per foot per month for non-residents, and Commercial Boats slips based on the total amount of passengers carried by the vessel assigned to the slip or special purpose (MR)
Commissioner Berfield requested this item be continued to allow for input from the Marine Advisory Board. They will be meeting on October 10th.
Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item until the Marine Advisory Board makes a recommendation regarding the rate increases. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #37 - Authorization to proceed with advertisement of an RFP and to begin selection process for Professional Services to provide a feasibility study regarding a new FDOT bridge at
S.R.60 and the inland waterway (Memorial Causeway)(PW)
In March of 1993 the City applied, through the Local Government Cooperative Assistance Program, for a joint City-State bridge feasibility study. The study was estimated to cost approximately
$100,000 which was to be shared equally by the City and State.
The City was informed in June, 1993 that, while the City's proposed project had been ranked No. 5 among all applications, the funds available for such projects were to be completely
consumed by the first and second ranked proposals.
The City has learned through conferences with District 7 FDOT officials that should the City desire to pay 100% of the cost of the feasibility study (still estimated at $100,000) the
study could go forward under the City's auspices and maintain the full validity that would have been associated with the Cooperative Assistance Program scenario. This simply means that
the City will have its scope of services, proposed contract, and fee schedule examined and approved by FDOT in the same manner as if they are co-sponsors. Staff anticipates having the
consultant hired approximately 120 days from Commission approval.
Mayor Garvey asked if the City will be reimbursed and Public Works Director Bill Baker responded no.
The City Manager said this feasibility study may be needed as part of the Drew Street study and recommended approval.
In response to Commissioner Deegan's question, Mr. Baker said the estimate came from Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan, engineering consultants, and the Department of Transportation.
Mayor Garvey questioned the status of the Drew Street study and questioned whether the feasibility study should be delayed for a year to see if the state will fund it. She questioned
how the study can be started if it is not known what is going to happen to Drew Street. Mr. Baker said this is one of the reasons for the study.
Commissioner Thomas moved to authorize staff to proceed with advertisement of an RFP and begin the selection process for professional engineering services to provide a feasibility study
regarding a new FDOT bridge at S.R.60 and the inland waterway (Memorial Causeway). The motion was duly seconded.
Regarding the Drew Street study, the City Manager said we should hear from DOT in about 2-4 weeks. Questions were raised regarding the Drew Street study being critical. Mr. Baker
said the Drew Street study and this study are very closely related but nothing will be hurt by going ahead with this feasibility study.
Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned whether delaying this study a few weeks will allow the state to participate in the funding. Mr. Baker said the state does not have the money at this
time.
The City Manager pointed out the City has fronted up to $4 million in costs for the Drew Street project.
In response to Mayor Garvey's question, Mr. Baker said if this study is approved tonight, staff will immediately advertise for engineers to express their interest and in approximately
45 days the ranking of the engineers will be submitted for approval.
The City Manager recommended amending the motion that the funding for this project be diverted from the Highland Avenue project.
The maker of the motion on the floor accepted the amendment; the seconder concurred.
Commissioner Deegan asked if the scope of the study would include the feasibility of obtaining the necessary permits and Mr. Baker said it would. Commissioner Deegan questioned whether
$100,000 was sufficient for the study and Mr. Baker said it would be for the feasibility study. If the project is found to be feasible, a more expensive P, D & E study will then be
required.
Commissioner Deegan asked if the Commission was approving spending the money or sending out an RFP and the City Manager said this would establish the budget and authorize sending out
an RFP. He said the contract and the actual expenditures will come back for approval before proceeding.
Mr. Baker asked that RFP be changed to RFQ.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
ITEM #38 - Contract for construction of Solid Waste Complex to C.A. Oakes Construction Co., Inc., Tampa, FL, for $1,649,474.30; to be financed with a 20-yr loan from city's central insurance
fund with 20 equal principal payments of $82,473.72, together with interest at the cash-pool rate, due on 9/30 of each year, beginning 9/30/94 (PW)
The City has needed a new Solid Waste Complex for some time. The present complex, located at 1180 Russell Street, is old and inadequate. The buildings are not economically repairable
and the yard is not large enough to support the needs of the Solid Waste Division. This has been compounded by the encroachment of the Wastewater Treatment Plant which
was necessitated by the federally mandated advanced waste-water treatment requirements.
A new Solid Waste Complex has been designed for 1701 N. Hercules Avenue. The site plan has been approved by the DRC and the Commission. Bids have been solicited for the new complex
and C.A. Oakes Construction Company, Inc., was the low bidder at $1,649,474.30. The City's engineers' estimate of the project was $1,826,726.50 which includes an administrative building,
a container maintenance building with a detached storage building, a washrack and a paved yard for vehicle and equipment storage. The project does not include construction of the special
facilities associated with recycling, but does include the underground sewer and water services for such future operations.
Assistant Public Works Director Bob Brumback said the new Solid Waste Complex has been designed by the City's engineering staff. The solid waste complex will be on what is commonly
called the Campbell property and will accommodate a recycling center if approved. The complex will be aesthetically landscaped. In response to a question, Mr. Brumback indicated all
the bidders were prequalified.
Commissioner Thomas asked if any part of this complex is being built because the City may be doing their own recycling and Mr. Brumback responded no.
Commissioner Thomas asked why a metal building with a metal roof was chosen and Mr. Brumback said they are less expensive and the metal buildings in the City have presented no maintenance
problems. Mr. Baker felt the strongest, longest lasting material had been chosen.
Commissioner Thomas referred to funding this project from the insurance fund using the interest rate of the City's cash pool rate and questioned whether this was a floating rate. The
City Manager responded it is an average of the City's investments and is a changeable rate. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether a municipal bond should be done. Mr. Brumback said
the City's financial advisor said this was not large enough for a bond issue.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a contract for construction of the Solid Waste Complex to C.A. Oakes Construction Co., Inc., Tampa, FL, for $1,649,474.30; to be financed with a
20-year loan from the city's central insurance fund with 20 equal principal payments of $82,473.72, together with interest at the cash-pool rate, due on 9/30 of each year, beginning
9/30/94. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The meeting recessed from 10:39 p.m. to 10:51 p.m.
ITEM #39 - Receipt/Referral - Proposed LDCA re: minor variances (LDCA 93-24)(PLD)
For the past three and one-half years, staff has worked to eliminate code requirements which resulted in frequently granted variances. With this code amendment, staff will establish
an administrative, small scale variance approval process. This process will result in a less expensive, substantially shortened review for minor variances as specified in the ordinance.
The ordinance would allow the Development Code Administrator to grant minor variances as part of an administrative determination. The Development Code Administrator must consider whether
the variance meets all of the eight standards for variance approval before granting a minor variance. The applicant has the ability to appeal the decision of the Administrator to the
Development Code Adjustment Board as a regular variance.
As with the DCAB and Commission, the Administrator can establish reasonable conditions which will govern any variance approval.
The minor variances include small variances to side, rear and street setbacks, open space, landscaping, dock and fence regulations.
An administrative variance process was suggested as part of the "Healey Report" prepared some time ago to recommend techniques to streamline the Land Development Code procedures.
This code amendment will require review by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Development Code Adjustment Board.
The Commission may wish to also receive input from the Code Enforcement Task Force on this proposed amendment.
Commissioner Thomas moved to receive the proposed land development code amendment and refer it to the City Clerk for advertising for public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
ITEM: Scientology Case
The City Attorney announced his desire to meet with the Commission in closed session regarding the Charitable Solicitation Ordinance case brought by the Scientologists.
An attorney/client session was set for October 19, 1993 at 4:00 p.m.
ITEM: Sun Bank (Atrium) Building Contract
The City Attorney requested a special meeting to approve the Sun Bank (Atrium) contract.
A special meeting was set for October 12, 1993 at 5:00 p.m.
ITEM #40 - Receipt/Referral - Proposed LDCA re: prohibiting parking on grass or other unsurfaced areas in multiple family and nonresidential developments, unless specifically permitted
(LDCA 93-19)(PLD)
The Code Enforcement Division has requested a code amendment be prepared to preclude vehicles and other objects from being parked, displayed or stored on required open
space and landscaped areas. The Code Enforcement Division is finding it difficult to keep displays, storage and parking from occurring on these areas, given current code language.
The proposed amendment should provide the specificity needed by the Division to ensure adequate enforcement.
The Code Enforcement Task Force reviewed the item on September 15, 1993, and recommended its adoption subject to its application to single family residential properties. Staff would
suggest that, should the Commission desire to pursue this recommendation, a separate ordinance be prepared for single family properties.
The City Attorney said the proposal from staff was to amend the code to prohibit parking, displaying and/or storing of motor vehicles on grass or any unpaved areas for any multi-family
or non-residential use. He said Commissioner Thomas asked this be expanded to include single family residential as well. Mr. Galbraith said multi-family can be changed to residential
in the ordinance and would apply to residential and non-residential uses.
Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford said the main concern in single family residential areas is parking in the right-of-way indicating this is difficult to address.
Mayor Garvey commented she had concerns with this ordinance indicating she did not see this as a problem.
Commissioner Deegan stated by receiving and referring the item they would be providing a opportunity for public input on the issue.
Commissioner Thomas expressed concern in turning front yards into parking lots.
Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if this ordinance addresses the issue of unregistered cars. It was indicated the nuisance ordinance addresses that issue.
The City Clerk said this issue is handled through the Code Enforcement Board process.
Commissioner Berfield moved to receive the proposed code amendment and to refer it to the City Clerk for advertising for public hearing. The motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote
being taken, Commissioners Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan and Thomas voted "Aye;" Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried.
The City Attorney referred to the motion to amend the ordinance and consensus was for it to go forward along with the proposed ordinance.
ITEM #41 - Neighborhood Advisory Committee - 1 appointment (CLK)
Mayor Garvey requested continuing this item in order to discuss term limits for this committee.
The City Clerk said there is no ordinance establishing the NAC which was formed as a
result of Community Development Block Grant regulations and is contained in the Citizens Participation Plan adopted by the Commission.
Discussion ensued regarding how often the NAC meets and Commissioner Thomas said he believed they met the second Tuesday of each month.
Commissioner Thomas moved to appoint Jonny Gammage to the At-Large Clearwater category. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Thomas asked the City Attorney to draw up an ordinance formally creating the NAC encompassing all rules and conditions.
Mayor Garvey questioned whether an ordinance was necessary or if the Commission could set the parameters for this committee. The City Clerk said the code requires advisory boards to
be established by ordinance.
Commissioner Thomas asked if all City boards are established by ordinance and the City Clerk responded all except the Environmental Advisory Committee; however, it has been the intent
of the Commission to either abolish it or to create it by ordinance.
Consensus of the Commission was for an ordinance to be prepared.
ITEM #42 - Planning and Zoning Board - 1 appointment (CLK)
Commissioner moved to appoint Anthony Salmon. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #43 - Airport Authority - 1 appointment (CLK)
Commissioner Berfield moved to reappoint Theresa Goss. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #44 - Municipal Code Enforcement Board - 3 appointments (CLK)
Commissioner Berfield moved to reappoint D. Wayne Wyatt in the engineer category. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Thomas moved to appoint Dennis Henegar in the contractor category. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Deegan moved to appoint Tamara Shannon in the realtor category to complete a term to 10/31/95. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #45 - Other Pending Matters
A. Rental Agreement with Dr. Paul and Betty Jean Brown for city-owned property at 1171-1175 Cleveland Street (PW)
The City Attorney said this has become a problem because the Browns are out of state. He said the Browns plan to be out of the subject property by the end of November. He said the
rent for October has not been received and Mrs. Brown said she has been waiting to receive something in writing from the City.
Commissioner Thomas felt the Browns were taking advantage of the City.
Commissioner Thomas moved to evict the Browns.
Commissioner Deegan asked how long it would take to enforce eviction and the City Attorney responded it may take till the end of the month.
The motion was duly seconded.
Commissioner Deegan asked what the City would be gaining as the Browns plan to leave at the end of November and all they want is an agreement from the City to stay for the months of
October and November.
Mayor Garvey suggested signing an agreement contingent on the Browns paying the October rent immediately. If they do not, the City will start eviction proceedings.
Commissioner Thomas felt the Browns were not playing fair with the City and Commissioner Deegan concurred but found the Mayor's suggestion to be a reasonable compromise.
Commissioner Thomas amended his motion to include the Mayor's suggestion that the Browns pay the October rent immediately in addition to them paying in advance the rent in full for
the period remaining. The seconder accepted the amendment. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
B. Set October Town Meeting Date
The October Town Meeting was set for October 28, 1993, at 7:30 p.m.
C. Set October Sign Variance Meeting Date
A special meeting to hear sign variance requests was set for October 29, 1993, from 11:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
First Reading Ordinances
ITEM #46 - Ord. #5478-93 - Creating Sec. 21.15, to prohibit practice of requesting payment in exchange for "watching" a parked motor vehicle with certain exceptions
The Mayor questioned the reason for the ordinance. The City Attorney indicated a similar ordinance had been adopted by Tampa and he felt it would be beneficial to Clearwater to do
the same.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5478-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5478-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #47 - Ord. #5452-93 - Vacating 10 foot east/west alley lying south of Blk 12, Turners Sub. No. 3 & lying north of Blk 3, Starr & Savery Sub. (Episcopal Church of the Ascension,
V93-08)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5452-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5452-93 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan and Thomas.
"Nays": Garvey.
Motion carried.
ITEM #48 - Ord. #5487-93 - amending Ord. #5386-93, proposing city charter amendment to establish a department to be known as The General Accounting Office, providing for a special election
to submit this proposed charter amendment to the voters, changing date of special election from 11/2/93 to 1/11/94
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5487-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5487-93 on first reading. The motion was duly
seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan and Thomas.
"Nays": Garvey.
Resolutions
ITEM #49 - Res. #93-60 - Lot clearing
The City Attorney presented Resolution #93-60 and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Resolution #93-60 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute
same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM: Res. #93-54 - Authorizing City Manager to execute subordination of utility interests document with FDOT re: Parcel 800.02 declared surplus on 9/14/93
It was noted the item approving the subordination had been approved at the September 14th Commission meeting, however, the accompanying resolution had been over looked.
The City Attorney presented Resolution #93-54 and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Resolution #93-54 and authorize the appropriate officials to
execute same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #50 - Other City Attorney Items
A. Second Amendment to Easement Agreement with Florida Power regarding Stag Run Boulevard.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the subject easement agreement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B. 6 foot Drainage and Utility Easement, Tropic Hills Unit 2, Blk E, Lot 15 (Heitzman/Freeman)
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the subject easement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C. (Cont. from 10/4/93) Legal Department Computers
The City Attorney said he would like to add a compact disk reader or CDROM to his computer equipment. He indicated this will provide him access to extensive data bases. Questions
were raised if this reader had been budgeted for and it was indicated it had.
Commissioner Thomas moved to proceed forward with the Legal Department's computer equipment as long as the costs are within the budget. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney reported the Commission would be receiving the Sun Bank (Atrium)
Building contract and the Adult Use Ordinance. He indicated there will be a presentation at the October 18, 1993 Commission meeting regarding the adverse secondary effects of adult
use establishments which provides the factual predication for the ordinance.
ITEM #51 - City Manager Verbal Reports - None.
ITEM #52 - Commission Discussion Items - Continued less Items e and j.
a) Single, can of cold beer purchase at gas stations - Continued.
items b thru r are all Cont. from 10/4/93
b) Commission Rules - Continued.
c) North Greenwood Association request regarding Plaza Park - Continued.
d) Naming and renaming of parks - Continued.
e) Seville/Zom Development
Commissioner Thomas indicated he wanted to make sure the City gets a percentage of this land for park development instead of accepting cash in lieu of the parkland dedication requirement.
The City Manager recommended taking cash in lieu of the land as the land would be difficult to access.
Commissioner Thomas pointed out there is an entire development of people that have lost access to the water and felt the City had the right to designate a small park on the bayfront
for Seville.
The City Manager still recommended taking cash in lieu of land indicating the park would be very small serving basically a private community. It would be difficult to provide public
access to the facility. He felt the road issue may have to be reopened in order to address public access.
Mayor Garvey said if trees are to be saved there needs to be flexibility in developing the property. Commissioner Thomas said this is not a tree issue; this is a chance to give the
citizens a small park in their backyard.
Commissioner Fitzgerald indicated a public park needs to have public access and the City Manager said this will be difficult to provide. Mayor Garvey found it inappropriate to have
a public park in an area the public cannot access.
Commissioner Berfield questioned when the second stage of development comes in could the City combine the land from the first stage with the land from the second stage and the City
Manager said the City is already looking at it as a combined project.
Commissioner Thomas said his research shows the reason the ordinance was created was for developers to provide small parks for the residents adjoining the development.
Commissioner Berfield asked if a site plan is required to come in for the second stage and it was indicated the Commission had already approved it and sent it to DRC for final action.
Commissioner Fitzgerald expressed concern regarding access for the rest of the public and questioned whether there were any parks in the City that did not have total public access.
Commissioner Deegan found it impractical to do a small park in this development.
No action was taken.
Commissioner Thomas requested action be taken on installing a stop sign on the crosswalk to the recreation center citing safety concerns. The City Manager said this is a private road.
The City Attorney said this type of issue is usually addressed during site plan review.
Commissioner Berfield asked how the ZOM development will impact Tropic Hills and the City Manager felt it would not.
The City Attorney said he has recently received information regarding Seville Boulevard regarding the agreement for road repair, etc. and asked this issue be agendaed for October 21.
He indicated the crosswalk could be discussed then.
Commissioner Thomas said he is putting the City on notice regarding damage to the remaining trees during the construction process. He requested the City Attorney bring forward the
Tampa ordinance on trees.
f) State transfer of roads to local governments - Continued.
g) Keene Road - Continued.
h) Citizen volunteers - Continued.
i) Removal of art colony signs - Continued.
j) Rare environmentally sensitive land
Commissioner Thomas said there is a need to identify environmentally sensitive land.
Mayor Garvey said the City should do what they can to protect Camp Soule. Commissioner Thomas believed this should be handled by the boy scouts and this was being addressed.
Commissioner Thomas moved to require the City Manager to identify all remaining environmentally rare, sensitive land in the City of Clearwater and to come back with a plan to address
it.
The City Manager said there needs to be a clear definition of environmentally sensitive land.
Commissioner Thomas withdrew his motion to wait until staff comes back with a definition of environmentally sensitive land.
k) Water Treatment - Continued.
l) Public Libraries re: # of items checked out - Continued.
m) Parking around the Pinellas County Utilities Building - Continued.
n) Re-landscaping of Welcome Center - Continued.
o) Countryside Day - Spring of 1994 - Second Annual - Continued.
p) Fee Agreement with Snell Isle Properties, Inc. - Continued.
q) CDBG Funding Levels - Continued.
r) Budget Advisory Committee recommendations - Continued.
s) Tracking Items - Continued.
t) Code Enforcement Certification - Continued.
ITEM #53 - Other Commission Action - None.
ITEM #54 - Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 12:06 a.m. (11/8/93)