Loading...
06/02/1994 CITY COMMISSION MEETING June 2, 1994 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in regular session at City Hall, Thursday, June 2, 1994 at 6:01 p.m., with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Fred A. Thomas Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner Sue A. Berfield Commissioner Arthur X. Deegan, II Commissioner Also present: Elizabeth M. Deptula City Manager Kathy S. Rice Deputy City Manager William C. Baker Assistant City Manager Miles Lance Assistant City Attorney 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 Otis Green of Everybody's Tabernacle. 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 Proclamations: Safety Awareness Week - 6/12-18/94 Hurricane Awareness Month - 6/94 ITEM #5 - Presentations a) Recycling - Bob Brumback Bob Brumback, Assistant Public Works Director/Utilities, announced that residential curbside recycling pick-up will begin in June. He indicated the promotional campaign regarding this was begun today. He reported the recycling bins would be distributed during the next week. A sample TV spot was shown, which is to be shown on cable networks, promoting the recycling program. He distributed recycling bins to the Commission and pointed out the radio tags on the bins which will allow data collection by solid waste personnel. ITEM #6 - Approval of Minutes Commissioner Fitzgerald pointed out that on page 14, 7th paragraph, the word "meet" needed to be included between the words "not" and "the", and on page 31, last paragraph, untenable was mis-spelled. A corrected page 18 had been placed at the Commissioners' seats. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 19, 1994, as corrected. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #7 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Agenda Lois Cormier thanked Commissioner Thomas for his service on the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) and for the report written by the interns hired by Commissioner Thomas. She also thanked Commissioner Deegan for now agreeing to serve on the PSTA and suggested he spend sometime riding the buses with Bonnie Harding. She complained regarding the poor ramping of sidewalks in her neighborhood and submitted pictures. She suggested VCR tapes of the Commission meetings be available at the libraries. Bob Wright questioned why the additional costs for the Municipal Services Building had not been included in the original estimate. He felt the $700,000 to purchase the Bilgore property from the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) was double the assessed value of the property. He also felt moving expenses should not be included in the cost of the project. He questioned the $11 million estimate for the new police headquarters and the method of selecting a contractor. He felt specifications should be drawn and then bid out in order to get a true price. He expressed opposition to the immediate evacuation and demolition of the Annex. He stated that property should be declared surplus and advertised for bid, an asbestos survey done and only once sold, should the property be vacated. Ms. Deptula indicated a tour has been established for Mr. Wright and other individuals to show them the conditions in the Annex and the Utilities Customer Service Building. She stated she will provide additional information to Mr. Wright at that time. She indicated a bid has not gone out for a contractor for the Municipal Services Complex. Commissioner Thomas indicated the architectural services had not been bid as well. Mr. Baker indicated the project would be bid and the $11 million estimate for the Municipal Services Building is the total project cost, not just construction cost. Commissioner Thomas stated the estimates are worst case. PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM #8 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5619-94 - Vacating the southerly 5.25' of the 10' drainage & utility easement lying along the northerly side of Lot 9, Blk S, Brookhill Unit 7 (Thompson, V94-06)(PW) The applicant has a pool structure which encroaches approximately 2.1 feet and the decking another 3.1 feet. The applicant is proposing to enclose the pool and deck area. The City has an 8 inch sanitary sewer main lying on the property. The depth of this pipe is approximately 4 feet. If repairs to the pipe are needed, the City would still have sufficient width to remove and replace the existing pipe with the remaining 4.75 foot easement and the adjacent 10 foot easement on the abutting property. This request has been reviewed by the various city departments and divisions concerned with vacations. Central Permitting has no objection provided a variance of 0.25 feet be granted so the enclosure would be allowed 4.75 feet from the rear property line. All other departments concerned have no objections nor do Florida Power, General Telephone or Vision Cable. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the vacation of the southerly 5.25 feet of the 10 foot drainage and utility easement lying along the northerly side of Lot 9, Block S, Brookhill Unit 7. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioner Berfield questioned what would happen should the property next door also wish a vacation. Mr. Baker indicated the City would not vacate anymore of the abutting easement than they could and still leave room for work on the sanitary sewer line in the easement. Commissioner Berfield questioned if a precedent would be set by granting the vacation tonight. Mr. Baker indicated it would not. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously. The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5619-94 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5619-94 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 - (Cont. from 4/27/94) Public Hearing - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 24791 & 24825 US19N, Ken Marks Ford, Blk A, Lot 1 together with Ken Marks Ford 1st Add. Sub., Lot 1 (Marks & Gilliss, Inc./Marks Holding Co., Inc., SV93-65)(CP) The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the three existing freestanding signs to remain and to permit the existing attached signs for the auto repair business to remain: 1) an area variance of 7 square feet from the permitted 112 square feet to allow a freestanding sign with an area of 119 square feet; 2) an area variance of 17 square feet from the permitted 56 square feet to allow an auxiliary sign with an area of 73 square feet; 3) a height variance of 8 feet from the permitted 12 feet to allow an auxiliary sign 20 feet high; 4) a separation variance of 169 feet from the required 300 feet to allow freestanding signs 131 feet apart; 5) a variance to allow a second primary freestanding sign, 112 square feet in area, 20 feet in height, with a setback of 20 feet; and 6) an area variance of 128 square feet from the permitted 120 square feet to allow 248 square feet of attached signs for the automotive repair business. The applicant proposes to reduce the area and height of the "Ford" (northernmost) sign and the "Ken Marks Used Cars" (southernmost) sign, and maintain the "A-1 Used Cars" (middle) sign. The subject property is located on the east side of US19, south of McCormick Drive and is in the CH zoning district. Mr. Shuford requested this item be continued as the applicant has just raised questions regarding the code application to the freestanding signs. He stated he has not had time to research this matter and therefore requests the continuance. Commissioner Thomas questioned if an applicant causing a continuance pays the additional cost for advertising. Mr. Shuford indicated they did if additional advertising is required. Ed Armstrong, attorney representing the applicant, indicated they would pay any additional advertising expenses. He stated they would prefer to handle the variances for the attached sign tonight. Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item to June 16, 1994. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #10 - (Cont. from 4-27-94) Public Hearing - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property (Edgewater Drive Motel) located at 1919 Edgewater Dr., Sunset Point and Replat, Lots 2 & 3 less road (Fred & Vivian Whalen, SV 94-10)(CP) Originally, the applicant was requesting the following variances to permit the existing freestanding sign to remain: 1) an area variance of 16.5 square feet from the permitted 50 square feet to allow a freestanding sign with an area of 66.5 square feet; 2) a height variance of 5.5 feet from the permitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign 25.5 feet high; and 3) a setback variance of 3.6 feet from the permitted 5 feet to allow a freestanding sign 1.4 feet from the Edgewater Drive right of way. This item was continued from the April 27 sign variance meeting to allow revision of the application. In particular, the "Edgewater Drive Motel" sign, currently located on a pole and resting atop a limestone pillar extending upward from the office, is proposed to be lowered and relocated on the pillar. Upon examination of this proposal, it has been determined the attached sign area will not be exceeded. Further, the original height and area variances for the freestanding sign can be deleted. Only a setback variance for the lower sign panel is necessary to proceed with this proposal. The applicant is now requesting a setback variance of 3.6 feet from the required 5 feet to allow a freestanding sign 1.4 feet from the Edgewater Drive right of way. The subject property is located on the east side of Edgewater Drive, north of Sunset Point Road, and is in the CR-24 zoning district. The leading edge of the sign panel that is proposed to remain (that is, the lower panel) is 1.4 feet from the Edgewater Drive right of way. The opposite edge of the panel abuts the limestone pillar. In order to place the sign back 5 feet from the right of way as the code requires, it would be necessary to relocate it elsewhere on the property. However, there is no alternative position that is suitable for sign placement because the front setback is entirely developed with the motel building, parking and a swimming pool. Also, the pillar would obstruct visibility of the sign if it is relocated in compliance with the setback requirement. The existence of a freestanding sign 1.4 feet from the Edgewater Drive right of way will not detract from businesses that have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of the community. Staff feels the applicant's current request meets the standards for variance approval. Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a setback variance of 3.6 feet for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to the following condition: by maintaining a sign within the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent domain for road widening or any other public purpose. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #11 - Public Hearing - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property (Bayside Arbors Apartments) located at 2717 Seville Blvd., Sec. 17-29-16, M&B 33.011 (ZBA, Inc., SV 94-14)(CP) The applicant is requesting an area variance of 2 square feet from the permitted 24 square feet to allow a total freestanding sign area of 26 square feet. This will permit the placement of two sign panels on the entry feature in the Seville Boulevard median, one for Bayside Arbors Apartments, and the other for Seville Condominiums. The subject property is located on the east side of US19, at the intersection of Seville Boulevard and is in the OL zoning district. Seville Boulevard is a private drive serving two sizable residential developments: Seville Condominiums and Bayside Arbors Apartments. Both developments are offset from the US19 corridor, located behind commercial properties that front on the highway. The large "Seville" sign was removed from the Seville Boulevard median. In its place, two smaller sign panels are proposed. Both panels will be located on a low decorative wall in the median. The westernmost "Bayside Arbors" panel will be 20 square feet in area. This has been permitted by the City. The easternmost "Seville" panel will be 6 square feet in area. Together, the two panels will have a total area of 26 square feet. This is 2 square feet larger than allowed under the Limited Office zoning assigned to this private road. It is reasonable that both the Seville Condominiums and Bayside Arbors Apartments be identified with signs at their entryway. The requested 2 square foot variance equates to an 8% variance from the code. This is a minimum variance to promote identification of these two uniquely situated residential properties. The existence of 26 square feet of freestanding sign area will not divert attention from nearby commercial uses on US19. The granting of this variance will not detract from businesses or properties that have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of the community. Staff feels the applicant's request meets the standards for variance approval. Commissioner Deegan questioned why this did not fall under the new administrative approval allowances in the code. Mr. Shuford indicated he was not sure whether or not this application had been submitted prior to those amendments going into effect. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether the acreage for Seville was equal to, greater than, or less than the acreage for Bayside Arbors. Steve Patterson, representing Bayside Arbors, indicated the properties are about equal. Commissioner Thomas questioned why they were not equal size signs. Mr. Patterson indicated the developers of Bayside Arbors had purchased Seville Boulevard for signage rights and by so doing, also obtained the responsibility for maintenance of that road. He stated in the purchase they agreed to donate 4 square feet of the allowed signage to Seville condominiums. It turned out a reasonable sign would require 6 square feet which is the reason the request is for a 2 square foot variance. Commissioner Berfield moved to approve an area variance of 2 square feet for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #12 - Six Month Trial Period Review of Empress Cruise Lines Alcoholic Beverage Distance Separation Variance; request to extend trial period to 11/1/94 subject to modified conditions (Clearwater Bay Marina/LeVasseur, AB93-16)(CP) This is a six month trial period review for the Empress Cruise Lines alcoholic beverage separation variance. Original Commission approval conditions and public hearing discussion can be found in the minutes from the Commission meetings of December 2, 1993 and March 3, 1994. On April 14, 1994, the Development Review Committee (DRC) met with Empress Cruise Lines representatives, the marina owner, and their representatives concerning the final site plan for the cruise line operation. This meeting also allowed staff to address a number of concerns raised by both staff and the public about the operation of the cruise line and the conditions imposed by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Commission. Staff recommends an additional trial period in order to continue to monitor problems and concerns associated with this operation. Staff is hopeful future construction will allow access to the site to occur from Ft. Harrison Avenue through the new parking lot, rather than through the Seminole Street Boat Launching facility. This will alleviate many of staff's traffic concerns. Since Commission approval of the original separation variance request, the applicant has complied with a number of conditions; consequently, staff recommends eliminating these conditions. In the recommended conditions attached to these minutes as Exhibit A, a new condition 1 has been added to allow continuity of this case with the associated conditional use permit, and a new condition 16 has been added to address the parking management problems. Mr. Shuford indicated that based on action at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, a revised condition #3 is recommended. It would read as follows: The applicant shall complete all proposed site work associated with the parking facility by October 1, 1994. The construction of the walls, screening the residential properties shall be completed by May 27, 1994 except the northeast wall adjacent to the Beau Queen and Sarah Sichler property shall be completed within 30 days of the date of final wall design approval by the property owners but in no case, shall all wall construction not be completed by August 15, 1994. He indicated staff is also concerned regarding glaring lights from the parking area. He reported there have been parking problems with cruise line patrons using the Seminole Dock lot. He reported other operational issues have been raised and therefore, staff feels there is a need to request another six month trial period. Regarding construction of the wall, Mr. Shuford reported most of the construction has been completed, however, two property owners requested modification and the cruise line is awaiting sign-off from those property owners. However, he felt it would be advisable to establish a total deadline of August 15, 1994 and if the property owners have not signed-off on the design, the wall should be completed as originally designed. Howard LeVasseur, owner of the marina, stated he had submitted a letter to the City regarding the impact of the cruise line on Clearwater. He stated they had taken over a bankrupt marina, which had paid no taxes for sometime, back taxes were paid, impact fees were paid and a payroll for 100 people was established in the Clearwater area. He indicated $237,000 has been spent on improvements to the property. He also reported that in the proposed parking lot area, two derelict homes were removed. He indicated the parking lot is at the permit stage but there have been delays in receiving permission from Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). He indicated the completion of the construction of the wall has been held up by people wanting to have design approval. He agreed with Mr. Shuford's recommendation that if such approval is not obtained shortly, the wall should be completed by August 15, 1994. Commissioner Deegan thanked Mr. LeVasseur for the information that had been provided and stated it bore out what the Commission had anticipated regarding the economic impact and improvement to the neighborhood when they approved the alcoholic beverage separation variance. He stated he hoped if the additional six month extension is approved tonight, there would be as much improvement in the operational issues as there has been improvement to the neighborhood. Commissioner Deegan questioned staff's recommendation. Mr. Shuford indicated it was to accept the report and extend the trial period to November 1, 1994, subject to modified conditions. Commissioner Deegan questioned if an additional condition could be added that the cruise line do something to clarify to the public that the port fee is not payment to the City of Clearwater. Mr. Shuford indicated this could be done. Espen Tandberg, representing the cruise line, indicated the fee referred to is a service fee and it goes to any cost that is land based, i.e., police to direct traffic, printing, etc. He apologized for the confusion regarding this charge. He indicated every cruise line has such a service charge and it is not a tax collected by the City. Commissioner Deegan questioned how the cruise line could get the public to understand this. He stated complaints have been received by the City from the public and he was concerned regarding the City's image with people thinking the City was responsible for the $12 service charge. He stated complaints had also been received that campaigns regarding buy one ticket and getting another free resulted in the service charge being assessed for both passengers. Mr. Tandberg indicated it is always made clear the service charge will be collected whether the ticket is free or not. He stated when individuals call in for reservations they are told regarding this cost. Mayor Garvey asked Mr. Tandberg to explain why an employee of the cruise line had indicated the fee goes to the City and State. Mr. Tandberg indicated he did not know, but he would review the situation. Mayor Garvey felt that if it was being stated the City is receiving funds from this charge, the City should be getting those funds. Commissioner Thomas indicated in the advertising for the cruise line, it is clearly stated this is a port charge. He stated a port charge is common terminology because almost all ships dock on government owned property. This situation is unique in that there is no governmental land involved. He stated the cruise line is using the terminology of the business and it needs to be made clear that 100% of the fee goes to the cruise line. Commissioner Thomas stated it was bad business for this misrepresentation to take place and he was not in favor of the extension based on the cruise line's handling of this situation. Mr. Tandberg indicated misleading the public was not intended. He stated he has not received any calls regarding the service charge but he will look into this situation. Commissioner Thomas stated he felt there should be a price of the ticket, period, and no additional charges. He stated he approved the alcoholic beverage variance because he thought revenue would be coming to the City due to this being a gaming ship. Mr. Tandberg indicated the cruise line does pay sales tax, part of which come to the City. Commissioner Berfield indicated she would need to be comfortable that the cruise line will make certain the employees make it abundantly clear that Clearwater gets no revenue from the service fee. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if sales tax is paid on the service fee portion of the ticket. Mr. Tandberg indicated he did not know but he would provide this information. Mayor Garvey expressed concerns regarding the method of parking, stating a friend had gone on a cruise and due to the stacking method, although the individual had parked where cruise line employees had told him to park, his car was towed in order to allow other individuals to get out. She stated the individual had a brand new pick-up truck which is now scratched due to the towing. Mr. LeVasseur indicated there have been instances where cars have been towed. He stated the public does not always cooperate and sometimes parks where they are not supposed to. He stated there was one instance where cars parked per the cruise line, blocked a slip owner and the cars had to be towed. One car was damaged. Mayor Garvey pointed out the individual to which she referred parked where they were told to park. Mr. LeVasseur indicated he would provide information to the Mayor on who to contact in order to take care of this problem. Mr. Tandberg indicated the cruise line has added something to Clearwater. He indicated the cruise line has been voted the best value and most fun in Tampa Bay. He reiterated he would look into the misrepresentation regarding the service fee but that it was not done intentionally. He apologized for any employees that may have given out the incorrect information. Regarding the parking situation, he stated they are doing the best they can. He felt this cruise line had proven itself to be a decent company. Mr. Shuford pointed out the parking issue was the reason for the new condition #16. He suggested the following language for Commissioner Deegan's recommended condition regarding the port charge: the cruise line shall immediately clarify the port charge issue in its advertising promotions, sales arrangement, employee training and ticket schedules, so the fee is not identified in any way with any charge imposed or revenue received by the City of Clearwater. Commissioner Deegan requested the fee be referred to as a service charge and that part of the condition be that they remove all reference to port charges in their advertisement. Commissioner Deegan moved to receive staff's report on the Empress Cruise Lines alcoholic beverage separation variance and extend the trial period until November 1, 1994, subject to the conditions in Exhibit A, modifying condition #3 to read: The applicant shall complete all proposed site work associated with the parking facility by October 1, 1994; the construction of the walls screening the residential properties shall be completed by May 27, 1994, except the northeast wall adjacent to the Beau Queen and Sarah Sichler property shall be completed within 30 days of the date of final wall design approval by the property owners, but in no case shall all wall construction not be completed by August 15, 1994, and adding a condition #17 to read: The cruise line shall immediately clarify the "service charge" issue in its advertising, promotions, sales arrangements, employee training and ticket schedules so that the fee is not identified in any way with any charge imposed or revenue received by the City of Clearwater; and there shall be no reference to a "port charge." The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #13 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5613-94 - Amending Sec. 40.433 to add "Accessory Dwellings" as a permitted use in the Infill Commercial District (LDCA 94-09)(CP) Staff has developed the proposed ordinance which simply adds a single permitted use, accessory dwellings, to the new Infill Commercial (CI) zoning district. This use is added to promote the transition from residential to commercial in portions of this zoning district which is now predominantly residential. The ordinance would allow someone to continue to live in their home and operate any of the allowable businesses available under the CI zoning district. The Economic Development Department has recommended approval of this ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Board and the Development Code Adjustment Board both endorse the proposed code amendment. Commissioner Deegan questioned the definition of accessory dwelling in that he wanted to be sure the definition was adequate that no dilapidated buildings could remain. Mr. Shuford indicated the business would have to convert a residential structure to a business and they would then be allowed to remain in residence in that facility. Commissioner Deegan expressed concerns that the way the code was written, it sounds as if the dwelling could be separate from the business. Commissioner Thomas indicated he too was concerned regarding a loophole that would not require the properties to be cleaned up. Mr. Shuford referred to the definition in the code stating it would preclude such things as garage apartments. He stated the definition requires the dwelling unit to share a wall or roof with the business structure. Commissioner Deegan questioned if this would require meeting the code on both sides of the wall. Mr. Shuford indicated it would. Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a land development code amendment concerning accessory dwellings in the Infill Commercial zoning district. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5613-94 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass Ordinance #5613-94 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 Ord. #5597-94 - Amending Sec. 40.489 to establish new parking requirements for Bayfront Core and Eastern Corridor subdistricts of Urban Center District; also receive report on parking conditions in downtown (LDCA94-06)(CP) This ordinance has been developed as a result of the Sun Bank building transaction. The buyer of the building believed parking available to that building is inadequate. As the Commission is aware, the current regulations for downtown Clearwater provide a reduced parking standard from other areas in the City. While many downtowns in Florida and across the country allow a reduced parking requirement as an inducement to locate development downtown, if this parking is inadequate, and public parking facilities do not fill the gap between parking demand and privately provided parking, then the long term impact on downtown Clearwater could very well be negative. To determine the need for revised regulations, the Public Works Department prepared a parking analysis for downtown. The analysis examines a number of subsectors in the downtown area for compliance with current and "suburban" parking standards, using estimates of parking needs based on estimated floor area within each subsector. "Surpluses" (where parking provided exceeds parking needs) and "deficits" (where parking provided is less than needed) were indicated by subsector. This study shows significant parking deficits in portions of the Bayfront and Core subdistricts even under the current, reduced parking standards. The proposed ordinance eliminates the "bonus" for downtown parking requirements, except for existing nonconforming situations and new or expanded uses having a parking requirement of 10 of fewer spaces. In all other cases, the City's "suburban" parking standards would be applicable. Redevelopment situations like the Bayfront Mart will not require added parking until more than 50% of the floor area of the building changes use. Needless to say, situations involving changes of use or new construction will face a significantly greater parking requirement under the proposed ordinance than is now currently the case. This ordinance is a very direct approach to resolving the parking deficit situation. The Commission should be aware other options exist such as: retain payment in lieu of providing parking from the existing code and tie funds received from this requirement to a comprehensive capital improvement project for the purpose of providing parking throughout the downtown; require (or, alternately, allow) partial meeting of the parking requirements in off-site lots located in the Eastern Corridor subdistrict. The City of Orlando uses this approach to keep its downtown core area from being overly oriented to parking uses and to encourage pedestrian traffic on the fringes of the downtown; and exempt existing buildings, regardless of changes of use, from the new parking requirements. All involve further study of the comprehensive parking needs of downtown Clearwater. Central Permitting staff has researched the parking options available across the country for downtown areas. This research, primarily involving the American Planning Association publication Flexible Parking Requirements, reveals there are six primary ways in which flexibility in parking requirement can be achieved. These six options, with an indication of whether an option is in the city's current parking regulations for downtown Clearwater and/or those proposed in the ordinance, are included as Exhibit B attached to these minutes. Please note staff is currently utilizing 5 of the 6 options, and is working on adding the 6th. Note also that, in the proposed changes, only 2 of the options would remain. Based on the information provided in the study, staff recognizes the need for revisions to the City's downtown parking regulations. However, staff is also concerned the proposed ordinance represents too significant a departure from the current regulations, possibly creating significant roadblocks to the redevelopment of downtown Clearwater. Staff recommends revising the ordinance to allow existing buildings to not be required to provide additional parking beyond what is currently provided, regardless of changes in use. This would "exempt" existing buildings from the requirements, and actually provide a bonus from current code requirements, but would result in new construction meeting the revised code. Staff also recommends further study of other flexible parking options to determine their desirability and applicability to downtown Clearwater. In particular, staff sees the off-site parking option, similar to Orlando's, as having possible advantages, especially if linked to the Jolley Trolley or PSTA for shuttle service. Any desirable revisions to the code can be added at a later date. On May 3, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Board endorsed the proposed ordinance subject to the exemption of existing structures as proposed by staff. On May 12, 1994, the Development Code Adjustment Board endorsed the proposed ordinance with the change recommended by both staff and the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Shuford reiterated that the study done by Public Works shows significant parking deficits in downtown should all the vacant properties become occupied. He stated there is a concern regarding the proposal creating problems for existing structures. An amendment is recommended that would exempt these structures. He reported the DDB opposes the ordinance and the CRA Executive Director is requesting it be studied in greater detail. Mayor Garvey questioned if the DDB had the amendment when they made their recommendation. Mr. Shuford indicated he did not know. The Mayor recommended the ordinance be sent back to the DDB with the amendment. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned the proposal that only adjacent properties could be used for off-site parking. He felt this would be very restrictive. Mr. Shuford indicated the proposal is far more restrictive than the current code. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned whether or not spaces in a parking garage would be counted. Mr. Shuford indicated under the current proposal, they would not. He stated public parking will be used up by existing businesses. Mayor Garvey stated that if there is a shortage of parking, a private commercial development may build a parking garage but she did not think this was probable if there is no shortage. Mr. Shuford indicated the ordinance could be amended further to allow for variances in certain cases. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned the impact of the ordinance if an existing structure is expanding. Mr. Shuford indicated the expansion would have to meet parking requirements. Commissioner Fitzgerald expressed concerns that the ordinance was fairly complicated. He also expressed concerns about redevelopment being stymied. He agreed the ordinance needed to be rethought and was in favor of the amendment to grandfather existing facilities. Mr. Shuford indicated if existing buildings are grandfathered, there will be an incentive to use those structures. He stated, however, if the desire is to have a lot of new structures, the proposed ordinance would complicate redevelopment efforts. Commissioner Deegan stated he was assuming the suburban parking requirements were chosen only to recognize there is a deficit in the parking. Mr. Shuford indicated this was so. Commissioner Deegan questioned why the parking requirements had been made more flexible in the downtown area. Mr. Shuford indicated this had been done in order to induce new development. Commissioner Deegan questioned if it also recognized the fact that less land was available. Mr. Shuford indicated this was so. In response to a question from Commissioner Deegan, Mr. Shuford indicated none of these situations had changed. Commissioner Deegan stated the same thing is true for downtown as for the beach in that there is a recognition there is a shortage of parking spaces. He stated if the Commission had not recognized a shortage in downtown, it would not have built the parking garages, developed the Kravas parking lot, or allowed parking on Cleveland Street. He stated the City is also trying to encourage redevelopment in the downtown area. He stated he felt the ordinance should permit fees in lieu of parking and those dollars be set aside for a capital improvement project for the provision of public parking. He felt all flexibility possible should be kept in the ordinance. Mayor Garvey suggested the ordinance provide that only at a certain magnitude of development trigger the new parking requirements. She recommended all the changes being considered for parking requirement in the downtown area, as well as in the suburban area, come in at the same time. Commissioner Deegan did not feel the downtown parking requirements should be delayed for the suburban parking amendments. Commissioner Berfield questioned whether or not ride sharing programs should be in the proposal. Mr. Shuford indicated he did not think ride sharing would be a viable option. Commissioner Berfield questioned where this sort of program worked. Mr. Shuford indicated it has worked in major downtown areas and major complexes. Commissioner Berfield questioned the use of overlap parking. Mr. Shuford indicated this does not work where uses are disbursed, however, where there are office uses and say for instance, a theater, it would work well. Commissioner Berfield questioned whether or not there was a middle ground between the proposed suburban parking requirements and what exists now. Mr. Shuford indicated he could investigate this. He also stated that parking could be looked at as varying requirements for different uses. Commissioner Berfield questioned possibly providing a standard for the size of development. Mr. Shuford indicated this would be possible or shared parking could be restricted to developments of certain sizes. Commissioner Thomas indicated he had many concerns regarding the proposal. He stated there is inadequate parking in the downtown area due to current lenient requirements. He stated a plan could be submitted at any time that would change the entire face of the downtown area. He wants the downtown to develop. He felt tonight modest adjustments could be made with more amendments at second reading, however, he felt the parking in downtown needs to be addressed now. He stated with the amendment proposed, existing properties become more valuable and this would be an incentive to fix up existing structures. He stated he could see amendments to the off-site parking issue and he would like to see flexibility given to the Commission in the ordinance. Steve Fowler, representing the design committee for downtown redevelopment and the Executive Board of the Chamber, spoke in opposition to the ordinance. He stated no one will be riding the bus or biking to the downtown area. He stated if the ordinance is adopted as proposed, redevelopment will not occur and such things as the Pat Lokey development would never have occurred. He stated the ordinance will eliminate the potential for parking structures without the provision for payment in lieu of parking. He stated Clearwater's downtown is in competition with downtowns throughout the country. He stated the current ordinance would also create more stormwater run-off and other problems. He stated the Chamber is requesting the ordinance be taken back to staff and it not be acted upon tonight. Commissioner Thomas pointed out that the amendment would provide for grandfathering existing buildings, regardless of change of use. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the proposed land development code for downtown parking requirements. The motion died for the lack of a second. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to send the ordinance back to staff for additional consideration based on tonight's discussion. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioner Berfield questioned what time frame would be required in order for staff to bring back the ordinance. She questioned if other standards were to be considered. Commissioner Fitzgerald indicated the consideration of other standards had been part of tonight's discussion. Mayor Garvey stated she felt input from the DDB, the Chamber and other groups would be necessary. Commissioner Deegan pointed out the DDB supports the flexibility of the current code. He felt if staff re-examined the flexibility, the ordinance could be brought back on the 16th of June after having called upon one or two people in the various groups. He felt while the ordinance needed further review, he also sympathized with Commissioner Thomas' concerns that there is a necessity to move forward as quickly as possible. Mayor Garvey expressed concerns this would not allow enough time for adequate input. Commissioner Deegan moved to amend the motion to have staff bring back the information at the June 16th Commission meeting. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioner Deegan indicated he was not opposed to input from other groups, but he did not wish to delay action on the item. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated he would agree to the time frame. Commissioner Deegan withdrew his motion. The seconder withdrew his second. Commissioner Fitzgerald amended his motion to add the time frame of June 16, 1994. The seconder agreed. Upon the vote being taken; Commissioners Berfield, Fitzgerald, Deegan and Thomas voted "Aye," Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried. Commissioner Berfield questioned if payment in lieu of providing parking would be considered. Mr. Shuford indicated this would be part of the review. ITEM #15 - (Cont. from 4-27-94) Public Hearing - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property (Parkside Office Center) located at 24639 US19N, Sec. 5-29-16, M&B 22.04 (First Florida Bank, N.A./Barnett Banks, Inc., SV 93-75)(CP) Due to a possible ownership change, this item is to be continued. Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #16 - (Cont. from 4-27-94) Public Hearing - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property (State Farm Insurance) located at 1234 Court St., Hibiscus Gardens, Blk O, Lots 12-19 (R & W Partnership, SV 93-114)(CP) The applicants requested this item be continued to June 16, 1994. Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item to June 16, 1994. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Public Hearing - Second Reading Ordinances ITEM #17 - Ord. #5557-94 - Amending Sec. 45.24 to revise standards for approval of variances (LDCA 94-01) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5557-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5557-94 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 #18 - Ord. #5587-94 - Amending various code sections regarding certain appointive boards and committees to change term of office from 3 years to 4 years The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5587-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5587-94 on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan and Thomas. "Nays": Garvey. Motion carried. ITEM #19 - Ord. #5598-94 - Annexation for property located at 1912 East Skyline Dr., Skyline Groves, Lot 57, 0.20 acres m.o.l. (Buenaga, A94-07) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5598-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5598-94 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 #20 - Ord. #5599-94 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low for property located at 1912 East Skyline Dr., Skyline Groves, Lot 57, 0.20 acres m.o.l. (Buenaga, LUP94-07) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5599-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5599-94 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 #21 - Ord. #5600-94 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 1912 East Skyline Dr., Skyline Groves, Lot 57, 0.20 acres m.o.l. (Buenaga, A94-07) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5600-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5600-94 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. #5601-94 - Annexation for property located at 3110 McMullen Booth Rd., Sec. 21-28-16, M&B 23.12, 0.75 acres m.o.l. (City, A94-08) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5601-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5601-94 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. #5602-94 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Institutional for property located at 3110 McMullen Booth Rd., Sec. 21-28-16, M&B 23.12, 0.75 acres m.o.l. (City, LUP94-08) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5602-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5602-94 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. #5603-94 - P/SP Zoning for property located at 3110 McMullen Booth Rd., Sec. 21-28-16, M&B 23.12, 0.75 acres m.o.l. (City, A94-08) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5603-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5603-94 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. #5604-94 - Annexation for property located at 608 Madera Ave., Del Oro Gardens, Lot 9, 0.21 acres m.o.l. (Schmidt, A94-09) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5604-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5604-94 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. #5605-94 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban for property located at 608 Madera Ave., Del Oro Gardens, Lot 9, 0.21 acres m.o.l. (Schmidt, LUP94-09) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5605-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5605-94 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. #5606-94 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 608 Madera Ave., Del Oro Gardens, Lot 9, 0.21 acres m.o.l. (Schmidt, A94-09) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5606-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5606-94 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. #5607-94 - Annexation for property located at 1404 Orange St., Sunny Park Groves, Blk G, Lot 17, 0.16 acres m.o.l. (Lowe, A94-10) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5607-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5607- 94 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. #5608-94 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low for property located at 1404 Orange St., Sunny Park Groves, Blk G, Lot 17, 0.16 acres m.o.l. (Lowe, LUP94-10) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5608-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5608-94 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. #5609-94 - RPD-E Zoning for property located at 1404 Orange St., Sunny Park Groves, Blk G, Lot 17, 0.16 acres m.o.l. (Lowe, A94-10) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5609-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5609-94 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. #5610-94 - Annexation for property located at 3136 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens, Lot 23, 0.16 acres m.o.l. (Herndon, A94-11) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5610-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5610-94 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. #5611-94 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban for property located at 3136 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens, Lot 23, 0.16 acres m.o.l. (Herndon, LUP94-11) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5611-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5611-94 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 #33 - Ord. #5612-94 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 3136 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens, Lot 23, 0.16 acres m.o.l. (Herndon, A94-11) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5612-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5612-94 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 #34 - Ord. #5614-94 - CPD Zoning for property located at 1297 S. Missouri Ave., F.E. Hanousek's Sub., portion of Lots 11 & 12 (Sears Roebuck & Co., Kash n' Karry Food Store, Z94-05) The applicant has requested this item be continued to June 16, 1994. Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item to June 16, 1994. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #35 - Ord. #5615-94 - Vacating northerly 1' of the 10' drainage & utility easement lying along the southerly side of Lot 18, Windsor Woods Sub. (Duthie, V94-05) The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5615-94 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5615-94 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 #36 - Special Items of widespread public interest - None. ITEM #37 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Agenda Shirley Moran thanked the Commission, City and Police Department for providing the Citizen's Police Academy. She indicated she was impressed with the standards of the Police Department and the program was well worth the 15 hours spent in it. CITY MANAGER REPORTS CONSENT AGENDA (Items #38-42) - Approved as submitted less #42. ITEM #38 - Receipt/Referral - Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban and RS-8 Zoning for property located at 112 Meadow Lark Lane, Bay View City Sub., Blk 1, south 80.75' of Lots 5 & 6, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Kinsley, A94-14, LUP94-14)(CP) ITEM #39 - Receipt/Referral - Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low and RS-8 Zoning for property located at 1312 Woodbine St., Pine Ridge Sub., Blk B, Lot 13, 0.18 acres m.o.l. (Jones, A94-15, LUP94-17)(CP) ITEM #40 - Receipt/Referral - Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low and RS-4 Zoning for property located at 1231 Keene Rd., Meadow Creek Sub., Blk C, Lot 1, 0.26 acres m.o.l. (Crawford, A94-16, LUP94-18)(CP) ITEM #41 - Receive and Refer the Preliminary Site Plan for Bay Area Women's Care located at NE corner of S. Ft. Harrison Ave. and Lotus Path subject to conditions attached to these minutes as Exhibit C; recommendation to accept fee in lieu of land to satisfy Open Space/Land Dedication requirement, DRC to approve final site plan (Lotus Land Inventory, Inc.)(CP) ITEM #42 - See page 22 Commissioner Berfield moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted less Item #42 and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #42 - Preliminary Site Plan for Morritt Place located at 515 S. Hercules Ave.; recommendation to accept fee in lieu of land to satisfy Open Space/Land Dedication requirement (Morritt Homes, Inc.)(CP) The applicant proposes to construct 30 apartment dwelling units on a 2.06 acre parcel located on Hercules Avenue, directly east of the Clearwater High School. The property is zoned Limited Office (OL) with multiple family dwelling units as a permitted use. The site is governed by the dimensional and numerical development requirements of the RM-16 zoning district. The site is sparsely wooded with pine trees and some oaks which, for the most part, are being saved. There is a 30 foot right of way along the southern property line of the subject parcel which is in the process of being vacated. There are two driveways proposed, one on Rogers Street and one on Hercules Avenue. The proposed development meets all of the RM-16 development requirements and upon vacation of the right of way, the additional area will only enhance the open space area of the parcel. The maximum trip generation rate for the proposed development is 168 trips per day. Hercules Avenue currently has a level of service of "A". A traffic impact study is not required and the proposed development is anticipated to have little impact upon the City road network. The Parks and Recreation Director has determined that because the site is so small and there are no City parks near the site, fees are preferred in lieu of land to satisfy the Open Space Land Dedication requirements. Commissioner Thomas expressed concerns that the plan does not show the stormwater drainage system. Mr. Shuford indicated this was receipt and referral and through the Development Review Committee (DRC) process, the final site plan will have considerable more detail than the preliminary plan. He stated they will be required to show where the stormwater run-off enters the system and at what point, it exits the system. Commissioner Thomas moved to receive the preliminary site plan for Morritt Place and authorize the DRC to review a final site plan subject to preliminary conditions as attached to these minutes as Exhibit D and approve staff's recommendation to accept a fee in lieu of land dedication to satisfy the Open Space Land Dedication ordinance. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. OTHER ITEMS ON CITY MANAGER REPORT ITEM #43 - (Cont. from 5/5/94) Modification to Pelican Walk certified final site plan located on the east and west side of Mandalay Ave., between San Marco St. and Poinsettia Ave. (B.J.E., Inc.)(CP) The applicant has requested this item be continued for six to eight months. Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #44 - Other Pending Matters a) Mid-Year Budget This report is based on six months activity (October, 1993 through March, 1994) in this fiscal year, and although in some instances variances have been noted in revenues and expenditures, some amendments are not proposed until additional data can be analyzed. At mid year, anticipated General Fund revenues exceed anticipated General Fund expenditures for the current year by $1,424,292, and that amount is recommended to be transferred to General Fund unappropriated retained earnings. General Fund revenues reflect the increase of Florida Power franchise fees and utility taxes at mid year by recognizing the abnormally warm spring. Forecasted revenue estimates received from Florida Power are based upon a ten year weather cycle. Janis Case, a Florida Power representative, confirmed the warm winter and hot spring have provided Florida Power with a substantial increase in estimated revenues, as much as 10% to 16% for the past several months. General Fund revenues also reflect an increase of $460,000 in prior year property taxes, which is primarily a result of the Church of Scientology settlement of $439,000, as well as an increase in building permit revenues of $100,000 due to the several large projects including Ultimar Phase III, the downtown hotel, and the Kash n' Karry at Searstown. The most significant budget amendments to General Fund expenditures include an increase of $46,160 for the reappropriation of funds returned by the Pinellas Private Industry Council from the 1993 summer jobs program, a budget increase of $60,030 in the Human Resources Department to fund the salary of the Special Assistant to the City Manager/Productivity Measurement position, and increases in the Fire Department and Building Services program for the retirement of long time employees. All of these budget increases in the General Fund are offset by savings in other departments or increased revenues. The budget expenditures also include funding for contractual services for the franchise negotiations assistance and utility tax compliance review services as approved by the Commission. The mid year amendments also include the residual equity transfer of $2,941,330 returning the General Fund dollars originally used to purchase the Atrium building. These funds will also be added to the General Fund unappropriated retained earnings at mid year. The most significant budget amendments to Utility Funds at mid year include the decreases in Gas Fund revenues and expenditures due to the delay in the issuance of the Gas Expansion bonds for Pasco County. Water revenues along with water inventory purchases are decreased at mid year to reflect a decrease in demand. Also, the Recycling Fund Residential program revenues and expenditures are established at mid year. Bridge Fund revenues increased at mid year by $13,430 to reflect anticipated interest earnings on the funds held in escrow pending the land purchase negotiations on the property for the Clearwater Pass Bridge. Program expenditures reflect the transfer of budget revenues to the Capital Improvement Fund to provide additional funding to the Clearwater Pass Bridge Construction project for stormwater requirements and other engineering services as approved by the Commission on April 7, 1994. The Marina Fund budget amendments reflect an increase in anticipated slip rent revenue due to the Commission approved increase, and Commission approved expenditure amendments transferring $95,010 to the Capital Improvement Program including the transfer of funds to separate the marina diesel fuel tanks, fund change order #1 to the Marina building contract, and provide funding for the sidewalk replacement at the City's main marina. At mid year, Parking Fund revenues reflect an increase in anticipated interest earnings based upon prior year actual earnings. No major expenditure amendments are proposed at mid year. The approved 1993/94 operating budget for the Pier 60 Fund reflected anticipated revenues and expenditures for a nine month anticipated operating period. With the grand opening of the New Pier 60 in April, the mid year anticipated revenue and expenditures of the Pier have been corrected to reflect a six month operation for fiscal year 1993/94. Mid year budget amendments reflect the appropriation of the proceeds from the sale of the Atrium, returning them to the originating sources based upon the initial funding of the purchase of the Atrium. Internal Service expenditures primarily reflect an increase for the purchase of Risk Management hardware and software necessary to bring workers' compensation and casualty claims in-house. The amendments to the Capital Improvement program total a net increase of $4,009,955 including the Capital Improvement budget increases which are summarized in Exhibit E attached to these minutes. The mid year budget report provides a significant amount of information on the budget and finances of the City, much of it in summary form. The Third Quarter budget review will update any additional financial changes whether acted upon or postponed. The City Manager indicated that primarily due to the increase in revenue from Florida Power and the settlement of the property tax case with the Scientologists, General Fund revenues exceed expenditures by $1,424,292. Commissioner Deegan requested an explanation regarding the amendment for increase in personnel services for the Special Assistant to the City Manager for Productivity. He stated he hoped the City was not spending $60,000 on productivity measures. It was indicated this individual also does other tasks than productivity. Commissioner Thomas stated that in the report, it shows the General Fund revenue ahead by somewhat over $500,000, not the $1 million-plus mentioned by the City Manager. The City Manager indicated that what is in the report is the variance between mid year and the actual budget. The $1 million-plus is projected by the end of the year. Commissioner Thomas complimented staff on having spent less than is in the budget. Commissioner Fitzgerald indicated that some of this could be the result of timing and that not all these funds will be left at the end of the fiscal year. Commissioner Thomas questioned the Utility Fund being under revenue projections. Tina Wilson, Budget Manager, indicated this is primarily due to the delay in the gas bond issue. The City Manager pointed out that operating revenues for the Gas System have actually increased over projections, however, what is down are installation fees, etc. due to the expansion of the Gas System having been delayed. In response to a question from Commissioner Fitzgerald, Ms. Wilson detailed the funds to which the revenues generated by the sale of the Sun Bank Building had been distributed. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned the funding for improvements to the Bayfront Mart (Maas Brothers) Building. Ms. Wilson indicated that what is currently in the budget is $2.5 million and that is for the renovation for the Stein Mart area. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if this was only for the middle floor. Commissioner Deegan indicated it would also include the roof and air conditioning. Ms. Wilson indicated that monies for the first and third floor would be included in the 1994-95 budget. Mayor Garvey expressed concern that on page 12, a decrease of $20 was "nit-picky". Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the mid year budget amendments. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Manager requested the Commission authorize payment to Dean Rowe for services for evaluation of the existing police department. She explained that while the Commission had approved this project, they had never formally adopted a motion authorizing the $54,000 for the study. Commissioner Thomas moved to authorize payment of $54,000 to Dean Rowe and Associates for the evaluation study of the existing police department. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. a-1) First Reading Ord. #5628-94 - Amending the Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year ending 9/30/94 The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5628-94 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass Ordinance #5628-94 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey. "Nays": None. a-2) First Reading Ord. #5629-94 - Amending the Capital Improvement Program report and budget for the Fiscal Year ending 9/30/94 The Assistant City Attorney presented Ordinance #5629-94 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass Ordinance #5629-94 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey. "Nays": None. b) Res. #94-11 - establishing an equity study commission to study the City of Clearwater's occupational license tax classification system and rate structure The Assistant City Attorney presented Resolution #94-11 and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Resolution #94-11 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. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if five members of the Committee were to be appointed, one each, by each Commissioner. It was indicated this was what had been agreed to. Commissioner Deegan requested the City Manager explain the Committee as the Commission is seeking volunteers. Ms. Deptula indicated the state legislature has passed a bill which will allow adjustment of the City's occupational license rates, however, in order to do this, an Equity Study Committee is required. Their report will be received by the Commission by October, 1995 and any changes would be effective in the occupational year beginning October 1, 1995. It was stated that the legislation and any other information that would assist the committee would be provided to the members. Commissioner Deegan requested that if there is anyone who wished to volunteer to call the City Manager's Department. Consensus of the Commission was to attempt to have the Committee appointed by June 16, 1994. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS ITEM #45 - Resolutions a) Res. #94-36 - Assessing the owners of property the costs of having mowed or cleared the owners' lots The Assistant City Attorney presented Resolution #94-36 and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Resolution #94-36 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. b) Res. #94-42 - Authorizing city officials to execute by hand or by facsimile signature, all checks drawn by the City on city accounts The Assistant City Attorney presented Resolution #94-42 and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Resolution #94-42 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 #46 - Other City Attorney Items a) Clearwater Pass Bridge Project - Easements The Commission is requested to authorize the City Manager to execute two easements which have been received from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Easement No. 29221 provides the City with an easement for the new channel. Easement No. 29058 provides the City with an easement for the new bridge. The documents need to be executed and returned to FDEP by June 8, 1994. Commissioner Thomas moved to authorize the City Manager to execute easement nos. 29221 and 29058 regarding the Clearwater Pass Bridge Project. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #47 - City Manager Verbal Reports The City Manager reported the results of the Annex Employee survey was included in the Commission mail. She indicated the report only provides the data regarding the responses to the survey questions. Comments included on the surveys are on file in the City Manager's Office. Commissioner Deegan indicated the comments are quite informative. ITEM #48 - Commission Discussion Items a) Direction re reconsideration of SV93-59 (Dickey/Rehabworks, Inc./Doctor's Walk-In Clinic) Todd Pressman, representative for the applicant, has made a request to allow reconsideration of sign variance case #SV93-59, which was originally heard on February 7, 1994. Mr. Pressman claims this is not a request to re-visit the same issue but rather an attempt to simply allow a re-filing of the variances for a temporary allowance of the existing signage until November of this year. This would allow the existing lease obligations to expire. The previous request was for the signage to exist permanently. Mr. Pressman states the zoning staff would not allow the temporary request to be filed as a new application. Mayor Garvey questioned what was being requested tonight. Ms. Deptula indicated a decision is needed whether or not to schedule this item for reconsideration. Mr. Pressman indicated that Doctors Walk-In Clinic had been provided a partial variance, however, this does not allow them to meet requirements of the lease agreement and the request that will be made will be to allow the sign, as it exists, until the end of November. Commissioner Thomas questioned if this was a delaying tactic. Mr. Pressman indicated that due to requirements of the lease, they are asking the sign remain until the end of November. He indicated he would have the lease with him at the hearing should the Commission grant the reconsideration. Commissioner Thomas moved to allow reconsideration of Sign Variance Case # 93-59. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #49 - Other Commission Action Commissioner Thomas requested the City Manager provide the Commission with an update regarding whether or not Pinellas Trail could be built, from the points at which it currently ends at the north and south, as far as possible and that a large sidewalk be constructed through the problem areas with signs posted that the trail begins/restarts at x distance from the new terminating point. He requested a status report regarding the cable franchise negotiations and wished his mother-in-law a Happy Birthday. Commissioner Fitzgerald reported that at the Mayor's Council meeting, the issue of the County Municipal Service Taxing Unit had been discussed. A recommendation from Largo is that the formula used to develop how funds are collected and used be reviewed and revised to make sure it is equitable. The City of Largo has done a study which Commissioner Fitzgerald provided to the City Manager. He requested this report be looked at closely. Commissioner Deegan thanked Commissioner Thomas for the colored pictures of Naples and questioned if they were being distributed to other interested groups. Commissioner Thomas indicated he had distributed the copies he had and had hoped those receiving them would move them on to the appropriate people. Commissioner Deegan stated there is still a state of confusion regarding the Pinellas Sport Authority (PSA) in that the Pinellas Sports Organizing Committee is now saying they never agreed to merge. He stated he is still trying to figure out where the PSA stands and will keep the Commission informed. Mayor Garvey questioned if the Commission would support a donation of $1,500 to the Tampa Bay Defense Task Force for the sponsorship of a technology show case. Concerns were expressed that not enough information was available. The City Manager indicated the $1,500 would be within her discretion. Consensus of the Commission was that should the City Manager decide it was worthwhile, this would be her decision. The Mayor reported a memorandum had gone out from Ream Wilson, Parks and Recreation Director, noting that private contractors will be maintaining the medians in Island Estates, Harbor Oaks/Ed Wright, Morningside and Countryside areas. ITEM #50 - Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:28 p.m.