The URL can be used to link to this page

01/19/1995CITY COMMISSION MEETING January 19, 1995 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in regular session at City Hall, Thursday, January 19, 1995 at 6:01 p.m., with the following members present: Rita Garvey Fred A. Thomas Richard Fitzgerald Sue A. Berfield Arthur X. Deegan, II Also present: Elizabeth M. Deptula Kathy S. Rice William C. Baker Pamela K. Akin Scott Shuford Cynthia E. Goudeau Patricia Sullivan Mayor/Commissioner Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner City Manager Deputy City Manager Assistant City Manager City Attorney Central Permitting Director City Clerk Board Reporter The Mayor called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was offered by Reverend Dennis MacAleer of Trinity Presbyterian 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 Two service awards were presented to City employees. Gertrude Devers, Central Permitting Department, was presented the January 1995 Employee of the Month award. ITEM #4 - Introductions and Awards Board. A Citation of Appreciation was presented to David Berry for his service on the Library Proclamation: League of Women Voters' Year - 1995. ITEM #5 - Presentations a) NUCOPS - Sid Klein - Postponed mincc01 d.95 1 01/19/95 ITEM #6 - Approval of Minutes Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 5, 1995, as recorded and submitted in written summation by the City Clerk to each Commissioner. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #7 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Aaenda Jacqueline Blango expressed concern regarding the loss of her HUD apartment in Pinellas Park when she was bed ridden and the negative effect that action has had on her son. She requested to be reinstated in her apartment. It was indicated she needed to contact Pinellas County and the City of Pinellas Park. Richard Enquist, representing the dancers at the City Hall Annex, expressed concern regarding the annex's closing. He requested the schedule of dances not be changed and submitted a petition regarding same. Assurances were given that every effort would be made to accommodate the dances at the Harborview Center and continue the same dance band contracts. The dancers were advised the annex will not close until December 1995. Jack Alvord expressed concern regarding contamination of his well from a nearby gasoline station. Staff to be in contact with him to address his concerns. Tom Sehlhorst reported on the Merchants' Crime Watch in the Infill Commercial zone area. Thirty of 60 businesses are participating. He said nothing as been done regarding the Kentuckian Motel. He noted his suggestion regarding the Police substation, playground, and phone booths was recognized. He expressed concern regarding waiting until June until two additional Police Officers are assigned to the neighborhood. He wished the following items be addressed: 1) 100 homeless; 2) vandalism in the Fred Astaire parking lot; 2) constant theft at Gulf Marine; 3) slow police response to problems with juveniles at Canvas Craft; 4) broken windows at Clearwater Plumbing; 5) panhandlers and vandalism of cars at Andy's Sports Car Center; 6) juvenile harassment at Dingy Dans; 7) loitering at night at International Auto Mart; and 8) drug and alcohol usage and loitering at the Quick Check Laundromat. The Mayor recommended Mr. Sehlhorst contact the Police Department regarding these types of concerns. The City Manager indicated she would forward a copy of Mr. Sehlhorst's comments to Chief Klein. Bill Stephan, Chair of the Marine Advisory Board (MAB), submitted a board resolution requesting the southern end of the old Clearwater Pass Bridge be retained as a fishing pier. The Board agreed a hanging fish walk off the new bridge was not practical. The Mayor questioned if a memorandum had been issued regarding this recommendation. Assistant City Manager William Baker said staff investigated fishing from the new bridge. No plans to save the old bridge were considered. The contract for the new bridge, which includes removal of the old bridge, has been awarded by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Staff can see if FDOT would consider a change order to leave part of the old bridge. He stated staff will review the suggestion and report on it. Mayor Garvey questioned if fishing from the bridge section would be desirable. Mr. Baker doubted the MAB would recommend a fishing pier if they did not think it offered good fishing opportunities. Mr. Stephan noted the Coast Guard has stated the old bridge must be mincc01 d.95 2 01/19/95 destroyed. He suggested a new fishing pier built on that spot would be no less of a navigational hazard than the end of the old bridge. Mr. Baker said staff can review the cost benefits if the Commission wishes staff to look into the suggestion. The Mayor thought staff had reviewed all alternatives. Mr. Baker indicated staff had reviewed all alternatives regarding fishing from the new bridge and said this was a new recommendation. Consensus was for staff to use less than eight hours to formulate preliminary numbers and come back to the Commission. Scott Geigel stated his interest in working for the City's Solid Waste Department and his particular concern with recycling and environmental issues. He said he could be an asset to the City and was willing to start at a lower wage. Mr. Geigel indicated he has a learning disability and is interested in making Clearwater look the best it can. The Mayor suggested Mr. Geigel submit some of his ideas and noted the City's need for volunteers. PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM #8 - (Cont'd from 01/5/95) Public Hearing - FY 1993-94 CDBG Grantee Performance Report (ED) Regulations established in Section 570.507 of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Act of 1974, as amended, require all program participants to forward a performance and evaluation report to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This report is due by December 31, 1994, 90 days after the end of the program year. The Economic Development Department has notified HUD of the delay in preparing the report. The Grantee Performance Report is the principal administrative report documenting the City's expenditures of CDBG Program funds to HUD and serves as the basis for monitoring the program for compliance and financial audits. Economic Development Director Alan Ferri reported fiscal year (FY) 1993/94 CDBG funds totaled more than $1-million. The Grantee Performance Report provides the City the opportunity to say how the funds were spent and how well the City adhered to its plan. Commissioner Thomas questioned what the City should do if Congress changes or cancels the funding of this program. Mr. Ferri said that could result in very severe problems for the community as these funds provide the primary capital resource for the City to deal with homelessness, AID's, etc. Communities throughout the country would be affected. He reported at a recent meeting in Jacksonville, FL, HUD indicated it anticipated reducing 60 categories and programs to three. Mr. Ferri felt it important that the public is aware of this radical restructuring. Commissioner Thomas indicated he addressed this topic because cities may have more burdens shifted to them. He requested Mr. Ferri inform the Commission regarding developments. Commissioner Deegan questioned if the attachment of the performance report was in its final form. Mr. Ferri said it was. Commissioner Deegan noted the report has the Public Hearing scheduled for December 1, 1994 and requested that be updated to reflect today's date. mincc01 d.95 3 01/19/95 Commissioner Deegan referred to page 1 and questioned where the summary of citizen comments was located. Mr. Ferri said no written reports were submitted. He planned to include any public comments received tonight. Commissioner Deegan indicated the public had made many comments regarding this program during the past year. Mr. Ferri said no comments were received regarding the Performance Report. The City Manager questioned where Jay Elliott's comments were. Mr. Ferri indicated Mr. Elliott's comments were included in last year's report. Commissioner Deegan said comments regarding the program have been made before the City Commission. Mr. Ferri said they planned to include comments received tonight and had received nothing during the year. Commissioner Deegan suggested the City Manager address this issue. The City Manager referred to comments received from the Elliotts and others. The Mayor questioned if those comments affect FY 1993/94. The City Manager indicated Mr. Elliott's problems began in FY 1991/92 even though he addressed the City Commission in FY 1993/94. Mr. Ferri indicated previous Performance Reports did include comments. HUD had looked into the Elliott issue and had sent a letter according to their finding. Mayor Garvey questioned what had been accomplished. Commissioner Deegan reported HUD had required remedial steps that were made but not reported. He suggested the Performance Report list the dates and times of public comments and how they were addressed. He indicated he was content to let the City Manager review this matter. Dina Atkins requested inclusion of her remarks with the Performance Report. She referred to a letter from Commissioner Thomas to the Charter Review Committee regarding the Elliott issue and documents submitted regarding City officials not fulfilling their duties. She indicated it was the City's responsibility to be certain that laws are enforced. Johnny Long said he had planned to attend earlier meetings that were cancelled. Mr. Long said he employed a number of people in the N Greenwood area but did not get adequate support from the Police Department. After three years in operation and with no violations, he felt he was treated like a criminal. When Alan Ferri was hired, Mr. Long requested a conference in his home. Mr. Ferri complied. Mr. Long indicated he invested $300,000 to establish his business but could not get local banks to lend him more than $25,000 leveraged on his investment. He noted federal law requires banks to reinvest in their community. He noted CDBG is not a handout program although it is treated as such. He said white people do not write checks to black businesses and expressed concern that he had not received the support he thought he deserved and requested more support from the City, Commission and staff. He indicated First Union bank was approached to be the lead bank for a slush fund for minority businesses. He said programs that have been getting CDBG funds for years have not become self supporting. Private corporations are not supportive. Commissioner Deegan said he understood the particular problem regarding leverage. He clarified that the City Commission offered money to the business community in N Greenwood in a program established last year to offer matching grants of $2,500 for rehabilitation and outright gifts of $500 to repaint. The Mayor indicated the Commission has changed its focus on the economic development in N Greenwood. She said the Commission has committed $150,000 for economic development besides housing renewal. Mr. Long said that was a drop in the bucket compared to what is spent on the rest of the community. As a business person, he said he needed the support of the City Commission and banks. He mincc01 d.95 4 01/19/95 expressed concern regarding the banks and referred to a new program about to be introduced by Mr. Ferri. Mr. Long said the program would not be successful unless it made a partnership between the community and the banks. He said Mr. Ferri is willing to work diligently and requested the Commission direct Mr. Ferri to get it done. Commissioner Deegan said when the Community Development Corporation (CDC) was formed in N Greenwood, three banks contacted were receptive to being included. Commissioner Deegan indicated the CDC is in abeyance until the Enterprise Zone issue is resolved. Mr. Long said he was not unfamiliar with the concept. He warned against establishing a plan without first receiving commitments from banks. He expressed concern regarding people trying to start businesses in these areas and having difficulty in borrowing against their businesses. Commissioner Berfield questioned plans for unallocated funds. Mr. Ferri said unallocated funds from previous years were rolled over into the current FY program. The reprogramming of those funds has already been authorized. Commissioner Berfield noted other programs may have requested additional funding in that fiscal year. Mr. Ferri said the federal government has strict rules regarding the handling of unexpended funds and requires a reallocation process. Mr. Ferri said if an urgent community need was identified, a reallocation process could be initiated. Groups whose requests were not funded all came from the public service section which has its allocations limited. The Mayor noted the needs of the public service section are always greater than what can be met by the City. Commissioner Thomas questioned if criteria for the CDBG program as developed by Congress required programs to eventually become self-supporting. Mr. Ferry indicated the criteria did not require that although many communities have tried to establish limits. Commissioner Thomas noted these funds should be earmarked to developing programs, not subsidize them for life. He recommended the criteria include a requirement that programs be capable of growing out of their dependence on CDBG funds. Mr. Ferri said the point system initiated last year requires programs to seek additional sources of funding. He recommended continuing to fund $120,000 in annual mortgage payments. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the FY 1993/94 Grantee Performance Report that documents the performance of the City's Community Development Block Grant Program during FY 1993/94. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #9 - (Cont'd from 01/5/95) Alcoholic Beverage Distance Separation Variance for property located at 1604 S. Missouri Ave., Sec. 27-29-15, M&B 21.01 & Loveland Sub., Lots 18-22 (Barnett Bank of Pinellas County/Walgreens Drug & Package Store, AB94-10)(CP) The applicant requests an alcoholic beverage separation variance for a new 3-PS alcoholic beverage license designation that permits package sales of beer, wine and liquor only. A Walgreens Drug Store, proposed for 1604 S Missouri Ave. at the intersection of Belleair Road, will replace the Barnett Bank building scheduled to be razed. The variance is required due to the proposed establishment's proximity to a church zone. The property, zoned Commercial Center (CC), is being rezoned General Commercial (CG). Barnett Bank is the present owner of the property. The applicant is a contract buyer. A mincc01 d.95 5 01/19/95 Preliminary Subdivision Plan and Preliminary Site Plan were submitted for the Commission's receipt and approval. The subject property is proposed to have an indoor floor area of 15,525 square feet. A total of 2,183 square feet will be devoted to the sale of package beer, wine and liquor. Though 14 parking spaces will be required for the alcoholic beverage sales section, parking will not constitute any problem. For the entire retail facility, 94 parking spaces are proposed. Trip generation analysis indicates the proposed store will have minimum impact on Missouri Avenue, currently categorized as a "B" level of service. Proposed hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday. There will no sales on Sunday. The Police Department and other City departments made no adverse comments concerning this request. On December 13, 1994, the Planning & Zoning Board approved a conditional use request to allow this use subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall obtain the requisite occupational license within six months from the date of this public hearing; 2) The requisite building permit shall be obtained pursuant to the certified site plan within one year from the date of this public hearing; 3) The related final plat shall be recorded within one year from the certification date of the preliminary plat; 4) The dumpster / compactor shall be visually screened, and gates shall be provided with a minimum 12-foot clear opening to the front for access by Sanitation trucks; 5) A clearing and grubbing permit and tree removal permit (or no tree verification form) shall be required prior to the issuance of a building permit; 6) A copy of the approved SWFWMD permit is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review prior to the issuances of the building permit; and 7) No building permits shall be issued until the property has been rezoned to General Commercial. The proposed 3-PS facility will be located in a freestanding retail establishment with 14% of the retail center devoted to the sale of alcoholic beverages. Under proposed changes to the alcoholic beverages regulations, this use would require a conditional use permit because total floor area "caps" of 10% (permitted use) are exceeded. No other establishment with an alcoholic beverage license is within 500 feet of the proposed location. Although this establishment is within 300 feet of a church use, it is separated by a 63-foot wide street right-of-way and landscaping on the proposed development. Moreover, goods would be received on the south-side of the property, out of sight from the church zone. Staff finds the request meets the standards for approval of Section 45.24 of the City Code, if conditions established by the Planning & zoning Board in granting the conditional use permit associated with the request are met. Items #41, #45, and #46 were also discussed at this time. Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford noted the first item to be discussed refers to the request for an alcoholic beverage separation variance for a new 3-PS alcoholic beverage license designation that permits package sales of beer, wine and liquor. Mr. Shuford referred to an aerial view of the subject property and indicated the front parcel is presently zoned as a shopping center although it is not used that way. General Commercial zoning is being proposed. Plans are to raze the Barnett bank building and erect a Walgreens in its place. The new bank branch will be constructed south of Walgreens. Jurisdictional Wetlands will be mincc01 d.95 6 01/19/95 zoned for preservation. Neighborhood commercial zoning is proposed for the corner of Belleair and S. Greenwood. Mr. Shuford said this development is positive and no concurrency issues affect Missouri Avenue. The billboard, on the property to the south, is in Largo. An alcoholic beverage separation variance is required because a church is located across Belleair Road from the Walgreens. The liquor store is proposed to be located at the end of the store furthest from the church. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if the preservation zone affects or changes the zoning of the single family dwellings on Belleair. Mr. Shuford indicated there would be no change to those residences. Commissioner Thomas questioned which land was owned by the developer and included in the proposal. Mr. Shuford indicated the single family dwellings are not part of the package and will not be in the preservation zone. Commissioner Thomas said he had no problem with Parcels 1 & 2 but questioned plans to rezone Parcel 3. Mr. Shuford said plans were to zone that parcel commercial. Commissioner Thomas questioned how the remaining property is zoned. Mr. Shuford indicated it is now zoned RM-12. Commissioner Thomas questioned if this use conforms with the new ordinance relating to alcoholic beverages. Mr. Shuford said the use would not be permitted outright but could qualify as a conditional use. Commissioner Thomas noted if the second reading of the alcoholic beverage ordinance had already occurred, the Commission would not be dealing with this issue. Mr. Shuford agreed. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) was involved with curb cuts, etc. Mr. Shuford said they would be involved. He indicated staff was requesting a receipt and referral of the plans tonight. Mayor Garvey noted this item contains a request for an alcoholic beverage separation variance. The receipt and referrals provide a starting process to review the land use and preliminary site plans. Mr. Shuford agreed the only final action requested tonight was the alcoholic beverage separation variance. FDOT will need to address questions regarding medians, curb cuts, etc. He expected some changes will be made to the plans. Commissioner Thomas questioned if Wetland provisions were violated when the Barnett Bank building was originally constructed. Mr. Shuford indicated that would be addressed during the review. Commissioner Berfield questioned how the change to the preservation zone will affect houses addressed on Belleair. Mr. Shuford indicated the preservation zone will abut their rear lot line. Tim Johnson, attorney representing Barnett Bank, indicated he was addressing Item #9 only. He said the Walgreens will be built as far south on the parcel as possible. He noted Walgreens traditionally have attached package liquor stores. The liquor store is being located on the south end of the building away from the church. A 90-foot variance is being requested. mincc01 d.95 7 01/19/95 The building is 210 feet from the church. The Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z) has approved the conditional use. He indicated Missouri Avenue is a major commercial corridor and felt this was an appropriate place for this use. He indicated the store will offer package sales only. He noted the City has encouraged redevelopment in the area. Reverend Hugh Harris, Pastor of the Missouri Avenue Baptist Church, read a resolution adopted by the church. He said there was no compelling reason for issuing a new liquor license. He noted three alcoholic beverage outlets near the church: 1) two streets to the north; 2) three streets to the south; and 3) across the street from the church. He expressed concern the liquor store will cause increased traffic at the intersection which is already noted for wrecks. He said there is no redeeming quality to this business and felt the liquor store will add to the church's burden to aid the community. The church is not opposed to other business enterprises but is opposed to a liquor store. Leroy Knackstedt said he lives across the street from the proposed development. He expressed concern that people who buy liquor in the neighborhood drop their empty containers in his yard. He opposed the liquor store. John Fleenor said he is a minister of the gospel. He said laws were made to protect things and felt a 90-foot variance is uncalled for. He said many things happen in the area at night and the Police are often there. He opposed the liquor store. Commissioner Deegan referred to the cover item and noted it indicated no alcoholic beverage store was within 500 feet of this proposed use. Mr. Shuford agreed a store across the street is within 500 feet of the church although separated by a 100-foot right-of-way. Mr. Johnson said a Pick Kwik is located across the street. He noted these are difficult issues and indicated people have sincerely held beliefs. He indicated only 14% of the store's floor space would be dedicated to the sale of alcoholic beverages. He felt Walgreens has done as much as it can to shield this use from the church including installing landscape buffering on the property's north end. He reiterated that Missouri Avenue is a highly commercial corridor. Commissioner Berfield noted under the new alcoholic beverage ordinance, a conditional use permit is required for businesses dedicating more than 10% of their floor space to this use. Mr. Shuford said the ordinance will require businesses to obtain a conditional use permit if between 10% and 15% of their floor space is dedicated to the sale of alcoholic beverages. Mayor Garvey questioned if P&Z had approved the conditional use permit. Mr. Shuford indicated they had. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the approval can be tied to Walgreens only. The City Attorney indicated the City could not specify Walgreens but the approval would be tied to conditions established by the P&Z. Mr. Shuford said if Walgreens does not develop the property, the development cannot meet the established conditions and will need to start over. Commissioner Berfield said she could not support the request. She said the 300-foot separation distance was established for a reason. Commissioner Deegan questioned how staff could consider the 63-foot right-of-way separating the church from the development as a special circumstance. Mr. Shuford agreed that reason was weak. He noted the design of the site does provide an added area of removal mincc01 d.95 8 01/19/95 between the two uses. The Mayor felt the developer had done more than necessary to separate the liquor store from the church. Mr. Shuford said that was for the Commission to determine. He noted the proposed development is for a Walgreens, not a convenience store or liquor store. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a variance of 90 feet to allow alcoholic beverage sales 210 feet from a church zone for Section 27-29-15, M&B 21-01 and Loveland Subdivision, Lots 18-22. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioners Fitzgerald and Thomas and Mayor Garvey voted "Aye"; Commissioners Berfield and Deegan voted "Nay." Motion carried. ITEM #10 - (Cont'd from 01/5/95) Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 2290 Gulf to Bay Blvd., Sec. 18-29-16, M&B 23.19 (West Bay Foods, Inc./Wendy's, SV94-40)(CP) The applicant requests three variances: 1) a variance of one menu sign to permit two menu signs; 2) an area variance of 9.06 square feet from the permitted 24 square feet; and 3) a height variance of 1.2 feet from the permitted 6 feet. The property, west of Landry Ave. on the north side of Gulf-to-Bay Blvd., is zoned General Commercial. The variance is requested to permit the two existing menu signs to remain. Senior Planner John Richter indicated while one menu sign per lane is allowed, two menu signs on one lane exist. When the property was surveyed for sign compliance, the owner was notified that the one existing menu was too large. Moving the sign did not correct the violation. Mr. Richter indicated no special circumstances support approval and staff recommends denial. Todd Pressman, representative for the applicant, verified pictures of the property presented him by Mr. Richter. Mr. Pressman was accompanied by Butch Jackson, representative of the sign company and Mr. DeSoto, the restaurant's general manager. He indicated there was miscommunication regarding the signs and the City's enforcement officer had identified this solution. Mr. Pressman said many circumstances are unique to this site. He noted the menu board is located at the mid-section of the property immediately before the drive-thru turns 180 degrees where customers can no longer view the information when ordering. He indicated another difficulty results from cars entering the drive-thru from other directions. If customers can see all the information and order quickly, the cars move through the line quicker. Mr. Pressman said the signs work well as they are. He indicated the applicant is not asking for a whole lot. The sign is invisible from Gulf-to-Bay Blvd. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the height variance was granted, could the square footage of the sign be reduced for a reasonable cost. Butch Jackson indicated that would not be practical. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the restaurant was asking to keep both signs. Mr. Pressman indicated they were. mincc01 d.95 9 01/19/95 Bill Zinzow congratulated the City Commission and the City for doing a great job with the sign ordinance. He said there was no reason some merchants agree to conform while others want exceptions. He recommended the request be denied. Mr. Pressman said the restaurant has conformed with the sign ordinance. He said they are only have a minor request regarding a sign invisible from Gulf-to-Bay. Mr. Jackson stated the height of the sign in front of the store had been reduced and the strip along the top of the menu board was removed. He said he had met with the Code Enforcement Officer on site and this is the only problem sign remaining. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the applicant had received a sign permit to install the sign in question. Mr. Richter said code requires a permit for the sign. Had one been requested, it would have been denied. Mr. Pressman said in the discussion with City staff, he thought this sign was judged to be a directional sign and did not require a permit. Commissioner Berfield moved to deny the following variances: 1) a variance of one menu sign to permit two menu signs; 2) an area variance of 9.06 square feet from the permitted 24 square feet; and 3) a height variance of 1.2 feet from the permitted 6 feet for failure to meet Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, items (1) -(4). The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #11 - (Cont'd from 01/5/95) Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 1835 N. Highland Ave., Sec. 2-29-15, M&B 31.04 (McClintock/Shanghai Express, SV95-01)(CP) The applicant requested three variances: 1) a height variance of 4.3 feet from the permitted 20 feet; 2) a variance of one message panel from the permitted two message panels; and 3) a setback variance of five feet from the required five feet to allow a freestanding sign zero feet from the Highland Avenue right-of-way. The subject property on Highland Avenue's east side is north of Greenlea Street and zoned Commercial Center. The variance is requested to permit the existing freestanding sign to remain. Mr. Richter said no special circumstances exist to allow the requested height or extra message panel. He noted the third panel is rarely used and recommended the Commission deny the request for these two variances. Mr. Richter referred to the setback variance request and noted the cost of relocation outweighed the public benefit and recommended this variance be approved. Enrique Largel, representative for the applicant, verified pictures of the property presented him by Mr. Richter. Mr. Largel said the variances are being requested because the sign, built 28 years ago, is very strong. He agreed one message panel can be removed. He felt the sign has never bothered anybody and noted the cola sign on the top was previously removed. mincc01 d.95 10 01/19/95 Commissioner Deegan questioned how large the sign is. Mr. Largel indicated the top sign is 24 square feet. Commissioner Deegan noted no one is complaining regarding the overall size of the sign which can be 150 square feet. He felt the sign's size was so far below the permitted square footage that he had no problem with permitting the additional message panel. The Mayor disagreed and said that made the sign aesthetically displeasing. Commissioner Fitzgerald referred to the third message board and questioned if it is ever used. Mr. Largel indicated the owners had removed the lettering. The Mayor noted her agreement with staff's recommendation. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the pole could be cut and the sign lowered. Mr. Largel agreed that was possible. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to deny the following variances: 1) a height variance of 4.3 feet from the permitted 20 feet to allow a 24.3 foot high freestanding sign and 2) a variance of one message panel from the permitted two message panes to allow a freestanding sign with three message panels for failure to meet Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, Items 1-4 and approve a setback variance of five feet from the required five feet to allow a freestanding sign zero feet from the Highland Avenue right-of-way, on property identified as Sec. 2-29-15, M&B 31.04, for meeting Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, Items 1 - 4, subject to the following conditions: 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. The Commission recessed from 8:32 to 8:45 p.m. ITEM #12 - (Cont'd from 01/5/95) Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 1264- 1274 Cleveland St., Padgett's Estates Sub., Lot 18 & part of Lot 19, and Moore, property of A.J. Sub., Lots 28-31 (Bakriwala/Big Apple Family Restaurant/Economy Inn, SV95-02)(CP) The applicant requests three variances: 1) a variance of one freestanding sign; 2) an area variance of 21.9 square feet; and 3) a setback variance of five feet to allow a freestanding sign zero feet from the Cleveland Street right-of-way. The subject property, on the northwest corner of Cleveland Street and N Betty Lane, is zoned Urban Center (Eastern Corridor). The variances are requested to permit the existing freestanding signs to remain. With an area of 21.8 square feet and height of 14.8 feet, the restaurant sign is modestly proportioned. Upon striking a balance between the cost to remove the sign and the public benefit derived from removal, it is staff's position that the cost would weigh heavy in comparison to the benefit. Mr. Richter indicated the Economy Inn and the restaurant share the property and both have freestanding signs. The sign for the Economy Inn, run by the property owners, substantially complies with code. The restaurant, which is leased, needs a sign. mincc01 d.95 11 01/19/95 Jerry Cobb, representative for the applicant, verified pictures of the property presented him by Mr. Richter. He said the conditions for approval recommended by staff are acceptable. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the owners understood the conditions. Mr. Cobb indicated they do. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the following variances: 1) a variance of one freestanding sign to permit two freestanding signs; 2) an area variance of 21.9 square feet from the permitted 64 square feet to allow two freestanding signs with a cumulative area of 85.9 square feet; and 3) a setback variance of five feet to allow a freestanding sign zero feet from the Cleveland Street right-of-way on property identified as Lot 18 and part of Lot 19, Padgett's Estates Subdivision, together with Lots 28-31, Moore, property of A J Subdivision, for meeting Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, Items 1- 4, subject to the following conditions: a) 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 and b) The restaurant sign shall not be enlarged or heightened. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #13 - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 473 East Shore Dr., Lots 6 & 7, Blk. C, Replat of Blk A, Clearwater Beach Park First Addition (Day/East Shore Resort Motel, SV95-03)(CP) The applicant is requesting a variance to permit a freestanding sign with an area of 19 square feet, a height of 13.2 feet, and with zero setback from the East Shore Drive right-of- way, in a zone where freestanding signs are not permitted unless a minimum 15-foot building setback exists. The subject property, south of Baymont Street on the east side of East Shore Drive, is zoned Beach Commercial. The variance is requested to permit the existing freestanding sign to remain. It is staff's position that special circumstances exist that support the granting of this variance. The freestanding sign is the only sign identifying this motel and there are not attached signs. The sign is modestly proportioned. The 18 square foot area and 13.2 foot height are considerably less than is allowed in this zone for properties that meet the building setback stipulation. William Day, owner, verified pictures of the property presented him by Mr. Richter and indicated he was familiar with the recommended conditions. Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a variance to permit a freestanding sign with an area of 18 square feet, a height of 13.2 feet, and with no setback from the East Shore Drive right-of-way, in a zone where freestanding signs are not permitted unless a minimum 15-foot building setback exists, on property identified as Lots 6 & 7, Block C, Replat of Block A, Clearwater Beach Park First Addition, for meeting Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, Items 1- 4, subject to the following conditions: a) 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; b) The sign shall not be mincc01 d.95 12 01/19/95 enlarged or heightened; and c) No attached signs shall be permitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #14 - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 19 Somerset St.; Lot 6, Blk. 2, Clearwater Beach Sub. (McCracken Apartments-Motel, SV95-04)(CP) The applicant is requesting a variance to permit a freestanding sign with an area of 6.2 square feet, a height of 10 feet, and with no setback from the Somerset Street right-of-way, in a zone where freestanding signs are not permitted. The subject property is located west of Mandalay Avenue on the south side of Somerset Street and is zoned Multiple Family Residential 20. Within residential zones, freestanding signs are allowed only for conforming uses and only to identify subdivision or property entrances. This sign, identifying the McCracken Apartments-Motel, is a nonconforming use. The variance is requested to permit the existing freestanding sign to remain. Special circumstances applicable to this property support granting the requested variance. The sign is modestly proportioned and is in scale and character with existing development in this neighborhood. Conforming uses are allowed freestanding signs in this zone. It would be inequitable to require that the freestanding sign be removed for this use when a residential use would be allowed a freestanding sign by right. Staff has in draft form a code amendment that, if approved, will allow a 24 square foot freestanding sign as a nonconforming use in residential zones. Adelheid Hanghofer, owner, verified pictures of the property presented her by Mr. Richter. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve a variance to permit a freestanding sign with an area of 6.2 square feet, a height of 10 feet, and with no setback from the Somerset Street right-of-way, in a zone where freestanding signs are not permitted on property identified as Lot 6, block 2, Clearwater Beach Subdivision, for meeting Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, Items 1- 4, subject to the following conditions: a) 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; b) The sign shall not be enlarged or heightened; and c) No attached signs shall be permitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #15 - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 880 Mandalay Ave., Mandalay, Blk. 21, Tract 1 and 1A, also 2 & 2A, 3 & 3A, 4 & 4A, & 5A of unplatted Blk. 21 and riparian rights (Mandalay Shore Apartments, SV95-05)(CP) The applicant is requesting the following variances: 1) an area variance for two entrance signs of 66 square feet each from the permitted 24 square feet to allow 90 square feet each; 2) a height variance of 4.8 feet from the permitted 6 feet to allow two entrance signs 10.8 feet high; and 3) an area variance of 37 square feet from the permitted 6 square feet to mincc01 d.95 13 01/19/95 allow a real estate sign with an area of 43 square feet, including 14.4 square feet devoted to identification of nonconforming uses. The subject property is bounded on the north and south by Eldorado Avenue, on the east by Mandalay Avenue, and on the west by the Gulf and is zoned Multiple Family Residential 28. The variance is requested to permit the existing entrance signs and real estate sign to remain. Each of the entrance signs has an area of 90 square feet and a height of 10.8 feet. The 90 square foot area is more than three times the code allowance. No special circumstances warrant approval of a variance to this extent. The message on the signs is made by attaching characters to the concrete block structure. The area of the signs could be modified to conform by replacing existing characters with smaller ones. It would be difficult to lower the signs' height given the concrete block construction and rock border. It is staff's position that the public benefit derived from a lower sign is minimal in comparison to the hardship to the applicant to modify the sign's height. The third sign has been classified as a real estate sign because it has a prominent red arrow containing the words "Now Leasing." The sign also identifies the name and address of the property and advertises the two commercial uses located on this property. The maximum area for a real estate sign is six square feet; this sign is 43 square feet. Despite the substantial overage in area, it is staff's position that strict enforcement is not warranted because the sign is critically situated to identify the property's name and address and serves as the property's primary identification. Without a variance, the most identification that could be placed in this location is an eight square foot address sign. Staff has drafted a code amendment that proposes allowing a 24 square foot freestanding sign for residentially-zoned properties that contain a nonconforming use. If the code amendment is approved, the applicant could place a 24 square foot sign to advertise the nonconforming uses, a six square foot real estate sign, and an eight foot square foot address sign, or a total of three signs cumulatively containing an area of 38 square feet. Staff recommends approval of this variance be conditioned with a restriction against placing any additional real estate signs or additional signs advertising the nonconforming uses. Mr. Richter referred to the entrance signs and said there was no reason to grant an area variance for the entire signs. He recommended reducing the size of the lettering. Todd Pressman, representative for the applicant, said three signs are being addressed. He noted that staff recommended approval of the critical "real estate" sign. Mr. Pressman referred to the uniqueness of the site and its location on a traffic circle. He said the two entrance signs are stylish and not gaudy or imposing. He noted each of the property's large number of entrances qualifies for a 24 square foot side on each side. A generous allowance for attached signage also is not used. Commissioner Thomas wished to depart from staff's recommendation. He felt "880 Mandalay" is an address and should not be counted as signage. He said the sign was similar to one approved for the Cypress Point Shopping Center. He indicated the building would suffer without the "real estate" sign because of the large turn over of occupancy. He felt the signs are not ostentatious. The building is has too few signs, not too many. mincc01 d.95 14 01/19/95 Mayor Garvey said she supports staff recommendation and noted the apartment building is in the middle of a residential area. Commissioner Deegan said Mr. Pressman explained the signage and compared it with the size of the property and building. He noted staff recommended approval of the "real estate" sign and the entrance sign structures. He questioned why the size of the letters on those structures should be reduced in light of fact that the facility could have much more signage than it already does. Commissioner Deegan moved to approve the following variances: 1) an area variance for two entrance signs of 66 square feet each from the permitted 24 square feet to allow 90 square feet each; 2) a height variance of 4.8 feet from the permitted 6 feet to allow two entrance signs 10.8 feet high; and 3) an area variance of 37 square feet from the permitted 6 square feet to allow a real estate sign with an area of 43 square feet, including 14.4 square feet devoted to identification of nonconforming uses on property identified as Mandalay, Block 21, Tract 1 and 1A, also 2 and 2A, 3 and 3A, 4 and 4A, and 5A of unplatted Block 21 and riparian rights, for meeting Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, Items 1- 4, subject to the following condition: There shall be neither any additional real estate signs nor any additional freestanding signs for the nonconforming uses. The motion was duly seconded. The Mayor reiterated that the development is in the middle of a residential area. Commissioner Berfield noted the signs face inward, not out. She felt putting "880" on top of the building would be more distracting. Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield, Fitzgerald, Deegan and Thomas voted "Aye"; Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried. ITEM #16 - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 467 Mandalay Ave., Clearwater Beach Park 1 st Addition, Blk. B, N 15' of Lot 26 & all of Lots 27-31, & Clearwater Beach Park 1 st Addition Replat, Blk. A, Lots 9 & 10 & vacated alley (JEC Funding, Inc./Eckerd Drugs, SV95-06)(CP) Mr. Richter indicated the applicant's attorney requested this item be continued. Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item until March 2, 1995. The motion was duly seconded. Ed Armstrong, representative for the applicant, confirmed the request that this item be continued. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously. ITEM #17 - Variance(s) to Sign Regulations for property located at 2430 Gulf to Bay Blvd., Sec. 18-29-16, M&B 13.04 (Alan Rophie, Ralph Rophie, Cecelia Betech, and Cheryl Cohen, SV 95-07) (CP) mincc01 d.95 15 01/19/95 The applicants are requesting a height variance of 5.7 feet from the permitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign 25.7 feet high. The subject property, on the northwest corner of Gulf-to-Bay Blvd. and Kilmer Avenue, is zoned General Commercial. The variance is requested to allow the existing sign to remain. The 2nd Chance freestanding sign is relatively new. It was issued a sign permit on July 6, 1994. When the sign was inspected on October 17, 1994, it was observed that the sign exceeds the allowable 20-foot height limit. The sign stands 25.7 feet tall. This occurred due to an apparent miscommunication between City staff and the applicants' sign contractor during the permitting process. The sign contractor submitted a drawing indicated a vertical dimension of 20 feet. Staff interpreted this as the overall height of the sign. However, the 20-foot dimension was to the top of the upper sign panel, not the top of the sign structure. Staff recommends that a variance of 0.7 foot be authorized. This would cause removal of the structure that extends above the upper panel, but would allow the upper panel to remain intact at a height of 20.7 feet. David Albers, owner of the business, verified pictures of the property presented him by Mr. Richter. He said the engineering drawing submitted for the permit shows the sign would be 24.1 feet tall. He indicated when he contracted with the sign company for the sign he trusted them to obtain the proper permits. He indicated it was never his intent to go against what is allowed by code. He noted the City approved the permit based on his submitted drawing. Mr. Richter said the permit was issued based on the drawing submitted to the City. Mr. Albers said the additional 4.1 feet is clearly shown on the drawing. Had staff said anything about the design at that time, he would have complied. Commissioner Thomas said this was a result of an error on staff's part. He felt the top tip of the sign was architecturally important. He said he could not support forcing the business to make the changes. Mayor Garvey said she agreed somewhat but did not feel the top was an integral part of the sign. Commissioner Deegan said the neon on the sign should also be discussed. He said some feel the lighting of a sign with neon should result in the whole structure being considered a part of the sign. He agreed with Commissioner Thomas' observation that others should not pay if the City made a mistake. He noted that is not an excuse to disregard the code. Mr. Albers said he has been in business with his franchise for eight months and the sign was very expensive. Bill Zinzow said he was delighted the Commission was addressing this type of signage. He noted the structure is much larger than the actual sign and neon frames the sign's perimeters. He agreed staff erred when approving the permit but did not agree the sign should remain. Margaret Mills said she lives behind the business which is an eyesore. She felt this is the most run down property on Gulf to Bay Boulevard. She listed several suggestions for improvement to the property and requested they be made conditions of approval. She said the mincc01 d.95 16 01/19/95 neighborhood bears the burden of having this property at the entrance to their neighborhood. She said it would benefit the neighborhood to have them clean up this mess. Katherine Roberts said she lives behind the subject property and the business' two garbage bins sit across from her front door. She indicated she had no problem with the sign. She said she has lived there for 15 years but the property has only deteriorated into this condition in the past six months. She complained that wrecked autos are scattered across the back of the lot. She requested a wall be erected to change the view from her front door. Mr. Albers said he subleases the front of the property while Lokey occupies and maintains the back of the property. He said he has invested $20,000 in the building where his business is located. He said it will be a showcase when he has the money. He is a year-round member of the community and takes pride in his business. Commissioner Thomas questioned the length of the original sign amortization period. Mr. Richter indicated seven years. Commissioner Thomas noted the business is young and the mistake was not Mr. Alber's doing. He indicated the Commission is beginning to review neon as part of signage and recommended turning off any neon above the 20-foot level and granting a three-year amortization schedule. Mr. Albers said he had no problem with that amortization schedule. He indicated the point, above the 20-foot mark, does not have neon. Commissioner Deegan said the problem with the sign structure is the massive base. He felt cutting off the top does nothing to address this concern. Mr. Richter said staff made that recommendation so all business on Gulf to Bay were on an equal footing. Commissioner Deegan indicated he would prefer the sign structurally remain the way it is with the neon removed. Mayor Garvey expressed concern this would not accomplish what the Commission wanted. She questioned if the Commission can force the business to turn off the neon. Mr. Albers said he will turn off the neon. Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a height variance of 5.7 feet from the permitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign 25.7 feet high on property identified as Sec. 18- 29-16, M&B 13.04. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioners Berfield, Fitzgerald, Deegan and Thomas voted "Aye"; Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried. Commissioner Berfield requested the problems brought up by the neighbors be addressed and that staff review requirements put on Lokey to see if they are being satisfied. Mr. Albers said he will do what he can to help. ITEM #18 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5713-95 - LDCA re neon lighting, illuminated area of signs & sign bases (LDCA94-24)(CP) Commissioner Thomas requested a 30-day continuation of this item because he had not received input from the Development Code Adjustment Board (DCAB). The City Manager indicated a memorandum was issued. Mr. Shuford reported that DCAB had recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. mincc01 d.95 17 01/19/95 Mayor Garvey said once the process starts, staff must hold applications contrary to this ordinance. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the clock stops once staff prepares an ordinance. The City Attorney indicated said, according to case law regarding pending ordinances, a City can refrain from issuing permits based on that ordinance. She did not recommend this law be used casually. Commissioner Deegan thought the City could not use a pending ordinance. The City Manager said the City could use a pending ordinance to deny a permit. Commissioner Berfield questioned if that law applies to variances, too. The City Attorney said the City could stop granting permits pending adoption, in the nature of a moratorium. She recommended caution in its use. Commissioner Thomas said he wished to continue this item for 30 days to review the minutes and conflicting opinions of DCAB and the Planning & Zoning Board (P&Z). Mayor Garvey referred to Mr. Zinzow's concern that these items are enforced retroactively. The City Attorney said the City could institute an amortization schedule. Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item for thirty days until February 16, 1995. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #19 - Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. 5755-95 - LDCA re outdoor retail sales, displays, and/or storage in the Beach Commercial and Resort Commercial zoning districts (LDCA)(CP) Staff has received a request from Jerry Miller to establish a car rental operation on Clearwater Beach. None of the zoning districts on Clearwater Beach currently permits car rental operations. The City regulates car rentals under the use category of outdoor retail sales, displays, and storage. Existing car rental operations on the beach were established before current land development code requirements. Given the tourist nature of Clearwater beach, staff feels the use is appropriate. Mr. Shuford said the P&Z has recommended approval of this proposal. Commissioner Thomas noted when the Commission addressed this earlier, he had indicated he wanted rent-a-heap type businesses prohibited and only standard new cars permitted. Mr. Shuford said he addressed that recommendation with the City Attorney who indicated the City could not be that specific regarding the types of vehicles but could address appearance issues. Commissioner Thomas referred to Sec. 41.053(23)(a) "the outdoor use shall not adversely affect the community appearance objectives of the City; in particular, the items displayed in the outdoor use shall be compatible with the surrounding land uses in scale and appearance." He felt the language is very subjective. The City Attorney indicated she could not find the ability to limit rentals to new cars. Commissioner Thomas reiterated his concern that the language is subjective. The City Attorney said the compatibility issue is something people are familiar with judging. mincc01 d.95 18 01/19/95 Commissioner Thomas said car rentals on Clearwater beach would be inappropriate because they would be uncontrollable in this small community with its limited real estate. Mayor Garvey questioned if this would require visitors to obtain rental cars at the airport. Commissioner Thomas noted rental cars are available Downtown. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if the proposal would create parking problems on the beach. Mr. Shuford indicated an applicant would have to get a conditional use permit at which time all site issues would be reviewed. Mr. Shuford noted car rental is a tourist business. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if anything addresses why this is not permitted. Mr. Shuford said nothing addresses this issue. He noted the general trend is to allow a wider range of uses with appropriate controls in place. Commissioner Fitzgerald agreed with Commissioner Thomas that there is a relatively constricted area on Clearwater beach and the number of vehicles there already is a problem. He said he did not support the suggestion the first time it was discussed. Commissioner Deegan agreed with Mr. Shuford's reasoning. He said the beach is a resort area where tourists expect to find rental cars within walking distance, not miles away. As this is an amenity tourists expect, he felt this type of business made as much sense for the beach as anywhere. He said the business would only require four or five parking spaces. Commissioner Deegan recommended reducing the size of parking spaces to increase their number. Commissioner Deegan moved to approve the code amendment concerning car rental operations in the Beach Commercial and Resort Commercial 28 zoning districts. There was no second. Commissioner Thomas moved to deny the code amendment concerning car rental operations in the Beach Commercial and Resort Commercial 28 zoning districts. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioners Fitzgerald, Berfield and Thomas voted "Aye"; Commissioner Deegan and Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried. Commissioner Deegan moved to that Commission Thomas explain to Jerry Miller why this item was denied. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #20 - (Cont'd from 11/17/94) Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5683-95 - LDCA re Wetland Area Setbacks (Amending Sec. 42.28 to require vegetative buffer setbacks adjacent to "Jurisdictional Wetlands" under jurisdiction of the State of Florida)(LDCA 94-21)(CP) Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item until February 16, 1995. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Public Hearing - Second Reading Ordinances ITEM #21 - Ord. #5722-95 - Proposed changes to the adopted Park Place Development of Regional Impact Development Order, revise development phasing from 1 phase with 3 subphases to 1 phase with no subphases; decrease office development by 7,400 sq. ft.; extend date of development build-out from 1996 to 2000; & provide for a wider range of future mincc01 d.95 19 01/19/95 uses to include office, industrial and multi-family uses (Subject Area - Sec. 17-29-16, M&Bs 23.01, 23.013, 23.02, 23.10, 23.11, 24.01, 24.02, 24.04, 24.05 & 24.06) (Storz Ophthalmics, Inc./Building Operation Holding Co.) On January 5, 1995, the City Commission passed Ordinance #5722-95 on first reading. Staff has corrected the dates of the associated transportation improvements. The Development Order has been modified to reflect the correct dates of road construction activity, as determined by the City Engineer. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the request for a Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) to the already approved Park Place Development Order and authorize staff to proceed with the intergovernmental coordination of this item with the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5722-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5722-95 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 questioned the slight modifications. The City Attorney indicated the ordinance was amended after first reading to correct typos. ITEM #22 - Ord. #5723-95 - Revision to City Ordinance 2.474, Police Officers Pension Plan, to comply with state and IRS requirements The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5723-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5723-95 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. #5724-95 - Annexation for property located at 3137 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens Sub., Lot 10, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Ottaviano, A94-23) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5724-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5724-95 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. mincc01 d.95 20 01/19/95 ITEM #24 - Ord. #5725-95 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban for property located at 3137 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens Sub., Lot 10, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Ottaviano, LU P94-26) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5725-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5725-95 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. #5726-95 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 3137 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens Sub., Lot 10, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Ottaviano, A94-23) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5726-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5726-95 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. #5727-95 - Annexation for property located at 1861 West Dr., Clearwater Highlands Unit B, Blk. B, Lot 11 and abutting r-o-w of West Dr., 0.21 acres m.o.l. (Carroll, A94-24) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5727-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5727-95 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. #5728-95 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low for property located at 1861 West Dr., Clearwater Highlands Unit B, Blk. B, Lot 11 and abutting r-o-w of West Dr., 0.21 acres m.o.l. (Carroll, LUP94-27) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5728-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5728-95 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. #5729-95 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 1861 West Dr., Clearwater Highlands Unit B, Blk. B, Lot 11 and abutting r-o-w of West Dr., 0.21 acres m.o.l. (Carroll, A94-24) mincc01 d.95 21 01/19/95 The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5729-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5729-95 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. #5730-95 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Institutional for property located at 707 Eldridge St. and 607 & 609 Railroad Ave., G. L. Bidwell's Oakwood Addition, Lots 50, 51 & 60, 0.42 acres m.o.l. (Mt. Zion United Methodist Church, LUP94-25) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5730-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5730-95 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. #5731-95 - P/SP Zoning for property located at 707 Eldridge St. and 607 & 609 Railroad Ave., G. L. Bidwell's Oakwood Addition, Lots 50, 51 & 60, 0.42 acres m.o.l. (Mt. Zion United Methodist Church, Z94-11) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5731-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5731-95 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. #5734-95 - Annexation for property located at 1613 & 1615 N. Betty Lane, Pine Ridge Sub., Blk. B, Lot 9 and abutting r-o-ws of Betty Ln. & Parkwood St. (Charlie Harris, A94-25) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5734-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5734-95 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. #5735-95 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low for property located at 1613 & 1615 N. Betty Lane, Pine Ridge Sub., Blk. B, Lot 9 and abutting right-of- ways of Betty Lane & Parkwood St. (Charlie Harris, LUP94-28) mincc01 d.95 22 01/19/95 The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5735-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5735-95 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. #5736-95 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 1613 & 1615 N. Betty Lane, Pine Ridge Sub., Blk. B, Lot 9 and abutting right-of-ways of Betty Lane & Parkwood St. (Charlie Harris, A94-25) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5736-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5736-95 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. #5737-95 - Annexation for property located at 3131 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens Sub., Lot 11, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Carmichael, A94-26) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5737-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5737-95 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 #35 - Ord. #5738-95 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban for property located at 3131 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens Sub., Lot 11, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Carmichael, LU P94-30) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5738-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5738-95 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 - Ord. #5739-95 - RS-8 Zoning for property located at 3131 San Mateo St., Del Oro Gardens Sub., Lot 11, 0.17 acres m.o.l. (Carmichael, A94-26) mincc01 d.95 23 01/19/95 The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5739-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5739-95 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 #37 - Ord. #5752-95 - Vacating the westerly 2.5' of the east 5' utility easement lying in Lot 7, Blk. 59, Mandalay Sub. (Tehan/Summers, V94-14) The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5752-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5752-95 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 #38 - Ord. #5754-95 - revised LDCA providing a comprehensive revision to City's alcoholic beverage regulations (LDCA94-17) Mr. Shuford said the ordinance has been amended to the Commission's recommendation that restaurants within 200 feet of a church or school be required to obtain a conditional use permit to serve alcoholic beverages. An exception is made for the urban core and eastern corridor. A new series of conditional use standards has been created. Mr. Shuford noted an error on page 18 where the specific zoning districts allowing outdoor seating are not specified has been corrected. He referred to the language on page 20 and indicated anyone reading it would realize they would not be exempted if they are within 200 feet of a church or school. Jay Keyes suggested the Commission change the method of measuring distance and suggested many problems would be avoided if the distance was measured from the point of sale to the closest property line. He indicated Walgreens' request would not have been a problem had this method been adopted. Bob Bickerstaffe referred to the alcoholic beverage use table on page 22 and suggested a separate classification refer to passenger ships that carry 50 or more passengers. He suggested the rules indicate when passengers can start drinking. Commissioner Thomas felt that was worth consideration and recommended staff review Mr. Bickerstaffe's suggestion. Mr. Shuford said passenger ships are addressed but indicated staff can add that classification to the table. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5754-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5754-95 as amended on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded. mincc01 d.95 24 01/19/95 Commissioner Berfield clarified that requirements regarding a separation distance from churches and schools had been tightened. It was indicated they had been. Upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey. "Nays": Berfield. ballot. Motion carried. Mayor Garvey indicated the next six ordinances will be included on the March 14, 1995 ITEM #38a - Ord. #5758-95 - re: appointment of vice-mayor as mayor during mayor's temporary absence, forfeiture of commission office, commission vacancies, commission salary increases; deleting requirement for roll call vote; clarifying language per commission actions The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5758-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5758-95 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 #38b - Ord. #5759-95 - re: requiring a referendum to transfer or use certain City owned property for other than City uses The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5759-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5759-95 on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded. Mayor Garvey said she was adamantly opposed to this proposal because she felt it would tie the hands of future City Commissions. Commissioner Thomas was adamantly for this proposal. He said the people of Clearwater own the property and they should decide what happens to it. Commissioner Fitzgerald said he opposed this proposal from the onset and agreed with the Mayor. Commissioner Deegan questioned if Commissioner Fitzgerald and Mayor Garvey were opposed to asking people if they want this property to be subject a referendum. Mayor Garvey felt the beach is more sacred and felt it, too, should be addressed. Commissioner Deegan said that was not the topic. He indicated this ordinance would allow the Commission to ask if mincc01 d.95 25 01/19/95 people want a referendum when decisions are made regarding the bayfront. The Mayor said the Commission is elected to make decisions. She said government should not be run by referendum. Commissioner Thomas said the existing Charter already reads this way except for a legal glitch. He felt people were mislead when they approved a referendum on the bayfront 12 years ago. He indicated this would clean up the earlier language. He said this is what people approved by vote 12 years ago. Commissioner Fitzgerald noted today's population is different from what it was then. He said he has read the Charter carefully and will vote against the proposal. He did not feel it is in the best interest of Clearwater. He recommended the voters read the proposal carefully and vote "no." Commissioner Berfield requested the City Attorney explain the two separate issues. The City Attorney said the previous restrictions that prohibit development below the 28-foot line remain in place. This ordinance is more expansive and prohibits the sale, lease, etc. of this property without a referendum. The Mayor noted if future Commissions decide the present City Hall is not adequate for City Commission meetings, a referendum will be required before the property can be addressed. Upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Berfield, Deegan and Thomas. "Nays": Fitzgerald and Garvey. Motion carried. ITEM #38c - Ord. #5760-95 - re: extending time frame for completing referendum petitions and increasing time for holding an election on a charter amendment initiated by petition The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5760-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5760-95 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 #38d - Ord. #5761-95 - re: amending requirement for referendum approval of revenue bonds only. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5761-95 for second reading and read it by title Bob Wright said the Charter Review Committee recommended any non-budgeted, non- emergency expenditure of $5-million or more should go to referendum. He said this mincc01 d.95 26 01/19/95 Commission ignored that recommendation and substituted this change in Article IX to raise the amount from $1-million to $5-million. He said he strongly opposed this ordinance. Bob Bickerstaffe agreed with Mr. Wright's remarks and opposition. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5761-95 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 #38e - Ord. #5762-95 - re: appointment of legal department staff by City Attorney, establishment of Assistant City Attorney salaries by City Attorney, providing consistency in manner of removal of City Manager and City Attorney, requiring City Attorney live in City. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5762-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5762-95 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 #38f - Ord. #5763-95 - re: identifying winning candidate, creating a provision for candidate vacancy, providing for a referendum election The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5763-95 for second reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5763-95 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 #39 - Special Items of widespread public interest - None. ITEM #40 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Aaenda - None. CITY MANAGER REPORTS CONSENT AGENDA (Items #41 -44) - Approved as submitted less Items #41 and #42. ITEM #41 - See Page 28. ITEM #42 - See Page 30. mincc01 d.95 27 01/19/95 ITEM #43 - Receipt/Referral - LDCA - Infill Commercial District rezoning of several properties in the Lakeview Road Zoning Study area (LDCA 95-02) (CP) ITEM #44 - Receipt/Referral - LDCA - Prohibiting parking on front lawns of single family, duplex and triplex uses and unpaved adjacent street right of way (LDCA 94-15) (CP) Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted less Items 41 and 42 and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #41 - Receipt/Referral - Land Use Plan Amendments & Zoning Atlas Amendments for property south of Belleair Rd., between Greenwood Ave. & Missouri Ave., 1601 S. Greenwood Ave. and the vacant property immediately to the south, 1610 S. Missouri Ave. and the property connecting these two parcels running behind the lots on the south side of Belleair Rd. (Barnett Bank of Pinellas County, Z 94-12, 13 & 14 & LUP 94-33 & 34) (CP) The subject property is on the south side of Belleair Road between Greenwood Avenue and Missouri Avenue. The applicant wishes to develop the property's uplands portion as commercial and to designate the Wetlands as preservation. The applicant proposes to raze the Barnett Bank building and construct a new Barnett Bank at the southeast corner of the property. Walgreens will be constructed at the property's northeast corner where Belleair Road and Missouri Avenue intersect. The applicant has received conditional use approval for package liquor sales for Walgreens. The property at the southeast corner of Belleair and Greenwood has a Future Land Use of Residential Urban. The existing grandfathered, nonconforming fruit stand will remain on the property. The intersection's southwest corner is in the County and has a Future Land Use of Commercial General with a zoning of C-2. The use of this property is a retail fish market/fruit stand. The northeast corner is vacant, is in the City, and has a Future Land Use of Commercial General with Neighborhood Commercial zoning. The intersection's northwest corner is in the City and has a Future Land Use of Residential Urban with Single-Family Residential-8 zoning. The use of these lots is single family residential. The lots run from Ewing Avenue to Greenwood Avenue with the first two houses fronting Ewing. The lots directly east of the applicant's property along Belleair Road are in the County and are developed as single family residential. The house next to the property proposed to be zoned Neighborhood Commercial has a home business, Car's Saw Shop, that appears to cater to walk-in and customer delivery and pickup. The proposed amendments would assign the same Future Land Use as presently existing on two of the corners and the same zoning as presently assigned by the City to the northeast corner. The proposed zoning would also legitimatize the existing retail use. SWFWMD has defined the jurisdictional boundaries of the Wetlands which have been fenced by the applicant. The Future Land Use Plan and Zoning Atlas Amendments to Preservation will delineate these Wetlands on the City's Future Land Use Map. mincc01 d.95 28 01/19/95 The property at the southwest corner of Belleair Road and Missouri Avenue is presently zoned Commercial Center. The property is proposed to be subdivided into lots with each lot being independently developed. The proposed General Commercial zoning is more appropriate for this type of development than the current zoning. There is no Future Land Use Plan Amendment involved for this part of the subject property as it already is classified Commercial General. Discussion of this item is also included under Item #9. Commissioner Thomas expressed concern regarding the single family residences in Parcel 3. He noted the current zoning may be for a commercial center but felt the commercial zoning on Belleair Road should be changed to residential. Mr. Shuford said the land use on the opposite side of Belleair is predominantly residential. He noted three houses have been razed since the aerial view was shot. He said the purpose for the change in zoning was to make development less intense. Commissioner Thomas noted the legal process begins once the item is received and referred. He questioned if it could be received and referred in such a way that the commercial zoning not continue down Belleair Road, thereby lessening the impact of the proposed development on the residential community on Belleair Road. He expressed concern that the development not infringe on the neighborhood. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned the intended use of the outparcel. Mr. Shuford said the site plan did not identify a use but called this an outparcel. He suggested the developer will market it for future development. The City Attorney said receipt and referral does not guarantee any rights. The Commission cannot require the developer to make any alterations to the application. She noted the developer could react to remarks made by the Commission at this time and refine the application. John Sims, representing Barnett Bank, indicated when the plat was being put together, no plans had been made for Parcel 3. He said they wished to work with City staff to make certain the City is comfortable with their plans. Commissioner Berfield questioned if all applicable boards will be told of the Commission's concerns. Mr. Shuford indicated they will be. Commissioner Thomas moved to receive the application for Future Land Use Plan Amendment to Commercial General and Zoning Atlas Amendment to Neighborhood Commercial for Lots 3 and 4, Loveland Subdivision and Part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27-29-15, a triangular portion at the northwest corner of M&B 21/011 (Z 94-13); receive the application for Future Land Use Plan Amendment to Preservation and Zoning Atlas Amendment to Preservation for Part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27-29-15, being the westerly portion of M&B 21/011 less the triangular portion in its Northwest corner (Z 94-14); receive the Application for Zoning Atlas Amendment to General Commercial for Lots 14 through 22, Loveland Subdivision and the Easterly Parts of M&B 21/01 mincc01 d.95 29 01/19/95 and 21/011 of the Northeast 1 /4 of the Northwest 1 /4 of Section 27-29-15 (Z 94-12); and Refer the Future Land Use Plan and Zoning Atlas Amendments to the City Clerk to be advertised for public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #42 - Receipt/Referral - RM-8 Zoning and Preliminary Site Plan for property located at 1550-1570 Jasmine Way, Lots 7-12, Blk A, Druid Groves, together with 1/2 of vacated street adjacent to W side of Lot 12 (Clearwater Community Hospital, Z 94-15) (CP) The subject property on the north side of Jasmine Way is one street south of Druid Road and runs from the Clearwater Community Hospital's west property line to Crest Avenue. Last year the hospital rezoned the north half of the block to RM-8 and received a conditional use for a parking lot that is currently under construction on the property. The hospital has purchased the remainder of the block and wishes to expand the parking lot. They have applied for a conditional use for the proposed expansion of the parking lot. The preliminary site plan for the expanded parking lot saves the larger trees on the property. The ongoing work on the north half of the block will fit with the proposed expansion of the parking lot. Commissioner Thomas said there was a great deal of public debate on this issue when the Druid Road properties were addressed. He questioned if the City is conforming to what was discussed that evening. Mr. Shuford said the Commission had requested the area of notification be expanded and staff will do that for this proposal. Commissioner Thomas moved to receive the Application for zoning Atlas Amendment to Multiple-Family Residential "Eight" and preliminary site plan for Lots 7 through 12, Block A, Druid Groves together with, 1/2 of vacated street adjacent to the west side of Lot 12, and refer the request for rezoning to the City Clerk to be advertised for public hearing and the preliminary site plan to the Development Review Committee for review and final approval. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Commission recessed from 10:40 to 10:54 p.m. OTHER ITEMS ON CITY MANAGER REPORT ITEM #45 - Preliminary Site Plan and Plat for property located on SW corner of Missouri Ave and Belleair Rd. and extending W to Greenwood Ave., Sec. 27-29-15, M&Bs 21.01 & 21.011, Sec. 18-29-16, M&B 13.04 (Barnett Bank of Pinellas County, PSP 94-28) (CP) The applicant has prepared a Preliminary Subdivision Plat creating five lots for the contiguously owned property of Barnett Bank of Pinellas County. Barnett proposes to build a new 5,552 square foot branch office building on Lot 1. Upon receiving a certificate of occupancy for the new branch bank office, Barnett proposes to sell the existing bank site (Lot 2) to the Walgreens Drug Store franchise. Upon completion of the new Barnett Bank building, the Walgreens' owner will raze the original bank building and erect the proposed 15,525 square foot Walgreens. The subject property is in the process of being rezoned from Commercial Center to General Commercial to allow appropriate setbacks and signage. mincc01 d.95 30 01/19/95 Points of access are proposed from Missouri Avenue and Belleair Road. An ingress/egress easement is proposed to serve both the proposed Barnett Bank building and the proposed Walgreens from Missouri avenue. Lot 3 of the Preliminary Plat indicates a proposed .74 acre outparcel to the west which will be zoned General Commercial. Staff recommends the Belleair Road driveway be used to access the proposed Walgreens Store and the proposed outparcel (Lot 3). A conditional use permit to allow package sales of alcoholic beverages including beer, wine and liquor (3-PS) was obtained from the Planning & Zoning Board. The applicant also received a minimum distance separation variance from a church across Belleair Road under current code requirements under Item #9 of tonight's meeting. (See page 5.) The remainder of the Barnett property (Lots 4 & 5) will be presented under a separate agenda item to amend the Barnett Property as follows: Lot 4 of the Preliminary Plat is jurisdictional Wetlands and is proposed to be amended from the existing Countywide Future Land Use Plan classification from Residential Medium and Commercial General to Preservation with a Preservation zoning designation. Lot 5 of the Preliminary Plat is proposed to be amended from the existing Countywide Future Land Use Plan classification of Residential Medium to Commercial General with a Neighborhood Commercial zoning designation. Preliminary Conditions include: 1) Signs and fencing/walls are subject to separate review and permitting processes; 2) The requisite building permits must be procured within one (1) year from the date of certification of the final site plan and all requisite certificates of occupancy must be obtained within three (3) years of the date of certification of the site plan; 3) The related final plat shall be recorded within one (1) year from the certification date of the preliminary plat or prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever comes first; 4) The dates and conditions for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board for conditional use approval and the Development Code Adjustment Board for variance approval shall be provided on the preliminary plat/site plan prior to certification; 5) Fire lanes shall be required on the side of structure. These fire lanes shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide and my not begin closer than 10 feet from the structure. This is in addition to any drives presently proposed; 6) The minimum turning radius for designated drives and fire lanes shall be 42 feet; 7) A fire hydrant assembly shall be installed not more than 300 feet from each structure; 8) If structure requires or has installed an automatic fire sprinkler system, a fire department connection shall be installed a minimum of 15 feet from the structure, adjacent to a paved drive and within 30 feet of a fire hydrant assembly; 9) Prior to certification, the Dumpster Requirement Form must be completed and returned to the City Sanitation Department; 10) Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the dumpster/compactor must be visually screened, and gates must be provided with a minimum 12-foot clear opening to the front for access by Sanitation trucks; 11) Prior to certification, a copy of the SWFWMD permit application is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review; 12) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review; 13) Prior to certification, the final site plan must be signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Florida; 14) A Pinellas County Public Health Unit Permit, Ingress/Egress and a 10 foot Utility Easement over the proposed water mains up to and mincc01 d.95 31 01/19/95 including meters, backflow prevention devices and hydrants are required prior to the issuance of a Building Permit; 15) Backflow prevention devices must be installed by the City with applicable fees being paid by the owner; 16) Prior to certification, a cross-parking/access easement linking the southern site and the subject site shall be executed and a copy provided to the City staff for review and approval prior to execution. This easement shall include language specifying which spaces are to be jointly used by the site, along with the number of spaces involved; 17) Sidewalks are required adjacent to all street rights-of-way; 18) Handicap spaces must be adjusted to meet government standards; 19) Parking stalls and/or driveways to be adjusted to the approval of the Traffic Engineer; 20) Dimensions to be shown on the plan to denote measurements for aisles, parking stalls, entrances, etc.; 21) Prior to certification, all protected trees shall be shown by size, species, and location; 22) Prior to certification, all required perimeter landscape buffers shall be dimensioned; 23) Prior to certification, the total paved vehicular use area and total interior landscape area calculations shall be expressed in square feet and as a percentage of the overall site in the site plan data block; 24) Prior to certification, all required parking lot interior landscape areas shall be depicted by shading or cross-hatching; 25) Prior to certification, a landscape plan shall be submitted to Environmental Management; 26) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a clearing and grubbing permit and a tree removal permit (or a no tree verification form) are required; 27) Prior to certification, a copy of the SWFWMD permit application and calculations shall be provided to Environmental Management; 28) Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit shall be submitted to Environmental Management; and 29) Prior to certification, the site plan must reflect the use of raised curbs or protective timbers where interior landscaped areas abut pavement. AND ITEM #46 - Preliminary Site Plan for Walgreens located at SW corner of Belleair Rd. & Missouri Ave., Sec. 27-29-15, M&B 21.01 (Toulomis, PSP 94-25) (CP) The applicant proposes to construct a 15,525 square foot Walgreens Drug Store with a two-lane drive through for pharmaceutical prescriptions and an attached liquor store for package sales of beer, wine and liquor (3PS). Walgreens will replace the existing Barnett Bank building, scheduled to be razed. A new Barnett Bank is proposed to be constructed on the abutting lot to the south of the proposed Walgreens. Points of access will be from Missouri Avenue and Belleair Road. The access point on Missouri Avenue will serve both the Walgreens Store and new Barnett Bank. Barnett Bank is the current owner of the subject property and the applicant is the contract buyer. The property is currently zoned Commercial Center and is in the process of being rezoned to General Commercial. Barnett representatives have submitted a Preliminary Subdivision Plat and Preliminary Site Plan for Commission approval to comply with the Countywide Land Use Plan. Building permits will not be issued until the Zoning Atlas Amendment has been finalized. Trip generation analysis indicates the proposed store will have a minimal impact on Missouri Avenue which currently has a "B" level of service. mincc01 d.95 32 01/19/95 A conditional use permit to allow package sales of beer, wine and Liquor (3PS) was obtained from the Planning & Zoning Board. The applicant also received a minimum distance separation variance from an existing church located to the north across Belleair Road under current code requirements. (See Item #9 on page 5.) The applicant has agreed to build to the numerical and dimensional requirements of the General Commercial zoning district. Permits will not be issued until the rezoning of the property is finalized. Preliminary Conditions include: 1) Signs and fencing/walls are subject to separate review and permitting processes; 2) The requisite building permits must be procured within one (1) year from the date of certification of the final site plan and all requisite certificates of occupancy must be obtained within three (3) years of the date of certification of the site plan; 3) The related final plat shall be recorded within one (1) year from the certification date of the preliminary plat or prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever comes first; 4) The dates and conditions for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board for conditional use approval and the Development Code Adjustment Board for variance approval shall be provided on the preliminary plat/site plan prior to certification; 5) Fire lanes shall be required on the side of structure. These fire lanes shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide and my not begin closer than 10 feet from the structure. This is in addition to any drives presently proposed; 6) The minimum turning radius for designated drives and fire lanes shall be 42 feet; 7) A fire hydrant assembly shall be installed not more than 300 feet from each structure; 8) If structure requires or has installed an automatic fire sprinkler system, a fire department connection shall be installed a minimum of 15 feet from the structure, adjacent to a paved drive and within 30 feet of a fire hydrant assembly; 9) Prior to certification, the Dumpster Requirement Form must be completed and returned to the City Sanitation Department; 10) Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the dumpster/compactor must be visually screened, and gates must be provided with a minimum 12-foot clear opening to the front for access by Sanitation trucks; 11) Prior to certification, a copy of the SWFWMD permit application is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review; 12) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review; 13) Prior to certification, the final site plan must be signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Florida; 14) A Pinellas County Public Health Unit Permit, Ingress/Egress and a 10 foot Utility Easement over the proposed water mains up to and including meters, backflow prevention devices and hydrants are required prior to the issuance of a Building Permit; 15) Backflow prevention devices must be installed by the City with applicable fees being paid by the owner; 16) Prior to certification, a cross-parking/access easement linking the southern site and the subject site shall be executed and a copy provided to the City staff for review and approval prior to execution. This easement shall include language specifying which spaces are to be jointly used by the site, along with the number of spaces involved; 17) Sidewalks are required adjacent to all street rights-of-way; 18) Handicap spaces must be adjusted to meet government standards; 19) Parking stalls and/or driveways to be adjusted to the approval of the Traffic Engineer; 20) Dimensions to be shown on the plan mincc01 d.95 33 01/19/95 to denote measurements for aisles, parking stalls, entrances, etc.; 21) Prior to certification, all protected trees shall be shown by size, species, and location; 22) Prior to certification, all required perimeter landscape buffers shall be dimensioned; 23) Prior to certification, the total paved vehicular use area and total interior landscape area calculations shall be expressed in square feet and as a percentage of the overall site in the site plan data block; 24) Prior to certification, all required parking lot interior landscape areas shall be depicted by shading or cross-hatching; 25) Prior to certification, a landscape plan shall be submitted to Environmental Management; 26) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a clearing and grubbing permit and a tree removal permit (or a no tree verification form) are required; 27) Prior to certification, a copy of the SWFWMD permit application and calculations shall be provided to Environmental Management; 28) Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit shall be submitted to Environmental Management; 29) Prior to certification, the site plan must reflect the use of raised curbs or protective timbers where interior landscaped areas abut pavement; 30) The applicant shall build to the General Commercial numerical and dimensional zoning district requirements; and 31) Building permits will not be issued until the Zoning Atlas Amendment has been finalized. Discussion of these items is included under items #9 and #41. Commissioner Thomas moved to receive the Preliminary Site Plan and Preliminary Plat for Barnett Bank of Pinellas County and authorize the Development Review Committee to approve a final site plan and final subdivision plat subject to the listed preliminary conditions and to receive the Preliminary Site Plan for Walgreens and authorize the Development Review Committee to approve a final site plan subject to the listed preliminary conditions. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #47 - Preliminary Site Plan for Bayside Nursing Pavilion located at the western portion of existing Bayview Gardens Continuing Care Retirement Community; authorize DRC to approve final site plan subject to conditions (The Morton Plant Hospital Association PSP 94- 12B)(CP) On June 16, 1994, the Commission received and referred a similar project at this location. The applicant modified the initial site plan by relocating the proposed two story 120 bed nursing home facility and sales center with associated parking away from the 100-year floodplain and placing the facility at the western portion of the existing Bayview Gardens property. The applicant proposes to expand the existing Bayview Gardens Continuing Care Retirement Community by constructing a 49,670 square foot, two story, 120 bed nursing facility with associated parking and stormwater management. All applicant owned property is shown on the site plan. The Bayview Gardens Continuing Care Retirement Community is built on a 31.91 acre parcel zoned Multi-Family Residential (RM-16) and General Commercial (CG). Bayview Gardens is a state licensed Adult Congregate Care Living Facility that currently has 94 assisted living beds in the Inseal Tower and 320 beds in the Garden Units. Five existing building with a total of 24 beds will be razed to accommodate the 120 bed nursing facility. A new drive is proposed to access Sky Harbor Drive to the west. mincc01 d.95 34 01/19/95 The applicant will need to obtain conditional use approval to permit the proposed nursing home in the RM-16 zoning district, as the original request was denied by the Planning & zoning Board. As a condition of processing the revised conditional use permit application, staff will require that the applicant drop the existing appeal of the Board's decision. The proposed expansion will increase the total parking spaces within Bayview Gardens from 371 to 396 parking spaces (including disabled spaces) and exceeds the 293 required spaces based on one parking space per two bed formula, plus one space per two employees. The Parks & Recreation Director has determined that no fee or land dedication is required, as the proposed development is exempt from the Open Space Land Dedication requirement. The applicant has agreed to remove some shoreline stabilization materials before issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the nursing home, if such is deemed appropriate by the City's Environmental Group. Preliminary Development Review Committee Conditions of Approval include: 1) Signs and fencing/walls are subject to separate review and permitting processes; 2) The requisite building permits must be procured within one (1) year from the date of certification of the final site plan and all requisite certificates of occupancy must be obtained within three (3) years of the date of certification of the site plan; 3) A Unity of Title shall be recorded prior to certification of the site plan; 4) The minimum turning radius for designated drives and fire lanes shall be 42 feet; 5) If structure requires or has installed an automatic fire sprinkler system, a fire department connection shall be installed a minimum of 15 feet from the structure, adjacent to a paved drive and within 30 feet of a fire hydrant assembly; 6) Prior to certification, the Dumpster Requirement Form must be completed and returned to the City Sanitation Department; 7) Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the dumpster/compactor must be visually screened, and gates must be provided with a minimum 12-foot clear opening to the front for access by Sanitation trucks; 8) Prior to certification, a copy of the SWFWMD permit application is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review; 9) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit is to be provided to Engineering Site Plan Review; 10) Prior to certification, the final site plan must be signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Florida; 11) A Pinellas County Public Health Unit Permit, Ingress/Egress and a 10 foot Utility Easement over the proposed water mains up to and including meters, backflow prevention devices and hydrants are required prior to the issuance of a Building Permit; 12) Backflow prevention devices must be installed by the City with applicable fees being paid by the owner; 13) Handicap spaces must be adjusted to meet government standards; 14) Parking stalls and/or driveways to be adjusted to the approval of the Traffic Engineer; 15) Dimensions to be shown on the plan to denote measurements for aisles, parking stalls, entrances, etc.; 16) Prior to certification, all protected trees shall be shown by size, species, and location; 17) Prior to certification, all required perimeter landscape buffers shall be dimensioned; 18) Prior to certification, the total paved vehicular use area and total interior landscape area calculations shall be expressed in square feet and as a percentage of the overall site in the site plan data block; 19) Prior to certification, all required parking lot interior landscape areas shall be depicted by shading or cross-hatching; 20) Prior to certification, a landscape plan shall be submitted to Environmental Management; 21) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a clearing and grubbing permit and a tree removal permit (or mincc01 d.95 35 01/19/95 a no tree verification form) are required; 22) Prior to certification, a copy of the SWFWMD permit application and calculations shall be provided to Environmental Management; 23) Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit shall be submitted to Environmental Management; 24) Prior to certification, the site plan must reflect the use of raised curbs or protective timbers where interior landscaped areas abut pavement; 25) The developer shall provide a larger scale site plan for DRC review; 26) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the concrete and rubble placed along the subject property's shoreline shall be removed; and 27) The applicant shall obtain approval for a nursing home conditional use permit from the Planning & Zoning Board prior to certification of the site plan. Mr. Shuford indicated changes have been made to the preliminary site plan. A blowup view of the proposed development will be provided. Commissioner Thomas noted the minutes from the January 5, 1995 Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting indicate discussion on this issue was continued and questioned the outcome of today's meeting. Mr. Shuford said the DRC discussed this issue but could not take formal action until the City Commission received and referred it. He indicated the development has received much scrutiny and staff is working with the property owner to be certain it meets code. Commissioner Thomas thought the DRC reviewed proposals prior to the Commission receiving and referring them. Mr. Shuford said staff includes the standard DRC requirements before Receipt and Referral with the recognition that changes will occur. Commissioner Thomas questioned if it was not unusual for the DRC not to have reviewed proposals prior to the City Commission receiving and referring them. Mr. Shuford said the DRC sometimes discusses preliminary issues as a courtesy but takes no action until the City Commission formally receives and refers a proposal. Commissioner Thomas noted the site plan includes an engineer's seal and questioned if this is the exact plant that will be considered. Mr. Shuford indicated this plan is preliminary and other plans will be submitted. Commissioner Thomas said the Commission was accepting an engineer's sealed drawings. Mr. Shuford recommended the project come back to the City Commission for final approval. Commissioner Thomas referred to plans for parking and questioned why current requirements are being changed and fewer parking spaces than normally required are planned. Mr. Shuford said the City code includes specific requirements regarding parking at a nursing facility. He noted the Garden Units were originally classified as a congregate care facility. Commissioner Thomas referred to State Statutes and noted the required parking must comply with City code. Mr. Shuford agreed. Commissioner Thomas said Bayview markets its wide openness, easy access, and individual parking spaces. He said he was not opposed to the development but wanted to be certain residents are not disadvantaged and lose their parking spaces. Mr. Shuford indicated staff will fully address the parking issue. Commissioner Thomas said he understood the need for growth but said the City must be concerned about the residents. Commissioner Berfield moved to receive the Preliminary Site Plan for Bayside Nursing Pavilion and authorize the development Review Committee to review the preliminary site plan mincc01 d.95 36 01/19/95 with the final site plan to return to the City Commission for final site plan approval subject to the conditions listed above. The motion was duly seconded. Alan Stowell said he owns the adjacent property. He noted the original proposal was turned down by the Planning & Zoning Board (P&Z). Mr. Stowell said he had no problem with the way the development has been relocated on the site. He expressed concerns regarding procedures. He said the letter he picked up today from staff did not include the most up to date information. He was concerned the Commission did not have the latest plans. He said he would like the opportunity to review the site plan and planned parking spaces. He noted there were several pages of revision. Mr. Stowell expressed concern that the new site plan does not provide a 15-foot easement for the City. He felt there was a problem with the number of parking spaces planned because he felt each Garden Unit should be required to have 1.5 parking spaces, not 0.5 space per bed. The Mayor noted Mr. Stowell's questions will be addressed through the DRC. Mr. Stowell expressed concern that basing the number of parking spaces on the number of beds would result in fewer spaces than required by code. He suggested staff review State Statutes. He felt the Garden Units are apartments and should meet apartment parking standards. The Mayor reiterated that the DRC will address these concerns. Commissioner Berfield recommended Mr. Stowell submit a typed list of his questions to Mr. Shuford for the DRC and staff to address. Mr. Stowell said staff has not yet addressed his concerns. The Mayor indicated staff will not address a project until the Commission first receives and refers it. Mr. Shuford said staff will pay particular attention to parking and easements on this development. Emil Marquardt, attorney representing the applicant, referred to Condition #26 and indicated the developer is dealing with five agencies to obtain permits to remove the concrete and rubble along the subject property's shoreline. He indicated they would be unable to remove the rubble before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. They are going through the process. Mr. Shuford said the City's Environmental Department will review that condition and make a recommendation. He agreed the condition is time sensitive. Commissioner Thomas said he was satisfied the minor changes made to the site plan were minor. He felt it was satisfactory for staff to proceed. Commissioner Deegan questioned if the applicant had dropped the appeal. Mr. Shuford indicated the appeal had not been dropped at this point. Mr. Marquardt reported his client is dropping the appeal. Upon the vote being taken, it carried unanimously. ITEM #48 - Res. #95-10 - providing for referendum to grant authority to give ad valorem tax exemptions should an Enterprise Zone be approved. (ED) Within Florida communities, some areas chronically display extreme and unacceptable levels of unemployment, physical deterioration, and extreme disinvestment. The resources of all levels of government are insufficient, and often inappropriate, to undertake the massive task of successfully restoring the social and economic productivity of such areas. To provide the private sector with the necessary incentives to invest in such distressed areas, staff mincc01 d.95 37 01/19/95 recommends the City seek methods to relax or eliminate fiscal and regulatory constraints and identify supportive actions that facilitate business investment in such distressed areas. The State will provide incentives for development through the "Florida Enterprise Zone Act of 1994": 1) Enterprise Zone Jobs Credit; 2) Enterprise Zone Property Tax Credit; 3) Community Contribution Tax Credit; 4) Sales Tax Exemption for Building Materials; 5) Sales Tax Exemption for Business Property Equipment; 6) Sales Tax Exemption for Electrical Energy; 7) Sales Tax Credit for Job Creation in an Enterprise Zone; and 8) Public Service Commission discount. Each locality may enact the following incentives: 1) Municipal public service tax exemption; 2) Economic development ad valorem tax exemption; 3) Occupational license tax exemption; 4) Local impact fee abatement or reduction; and 5) Low-interest or interest-free loans and grants. To enact the economic development ad valorem tax exemption, the City Commission must first adopt a resolution to provide a referendum to grant authority for such exemptions. The State Statute does not require a public referendum to enact the remaining local incentives. For the City to be competitive in the enterprise zone application process, Clearwater must show a strong commitment to the revitalization of the proposed enterprise zone. Adopting a resolution to hold a referendum on March 14, 1995, to decide if the City should be authorized to grant an economic development ad valorem tax exemption is imperative for economic development and the designation of the enterprise zone. Alan Ferri, Economic Development Director, said the Commission was not being asked to reach a final decision regarding enterprise zones tonight. He said the resolution needed to be approved tonight to meet the time table to include the question on the March 14, 1995 ballot. He indicated the State legislation does not allow substantial change to the question prescribed. He said the proposed exemption period would be ten years. A local committee would review applications from area businesses and certify which ones meet the criteria of the State Statutes. Mr. Ferri referred to a map and noted the areas that qualify as an enterprise zone are based on 1990 census statistics. The poverty level must be at least 30% and unemployment above the State's rate. He indicated 12,000 Clearwater residents live in qualifying areas. Commissioner Thomas questioned if all of the areas indicated on the map meet the criteria. Mr. Ferri said they do, according to State Statute. He noted the City is in competition with 29 other communities. At least seven others have expressed interest in applying. He said the competition will be stiff. If the referendum fails, the application will no longer be competitive. Mayor Garvey questioned who makes the decisions regarding requests. Mr. Ferri said a committee would be incorporated as an enterprise zone development agency and would make those decisions. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if the exemption from ad valorem taxes was for 10 years. Mr. Ferri indicated it was. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if there is a limitation on mincc01 d.95 38 01/19/95 the amount of the exclusion. Mr. Ferri indicated the exemption is only valid for improvements or new development. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned how great the ad valorem tax exemption would be for a business valued at $10,000 with an additional $5,000 in improvements. Mr. Ferri indicated there would be no ad valorem taxes on the $5,000 for improvements. He indicated the exemption only applies to business property. Commissioner Thomas noted in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) district, no tax increment for improvements would go to the CRA if that is part of the ad valorem tax exemption. Mr. Ferri said the theory under the Enterprise Zone legislation is to address areas where development is not presently taking place. The incentive would induce somebody to develop a business because of the exception. He said the committee will probably recommend a sliding scale instead of permitting a full exemption for the full ten years. He said with the incentives, a modest increase in development is projected. Today the area's yearly value is shrinking by 3%. He said the incentive should help boost this area to the same level of redevelopment that is occurring elsewhere in the City. Commissioner Thomas noted a great deal of real estate is being considered. He expressed concern that the area will be redeveloped and no new taxes will be collected while the City must provide additional services. Mr. Ferri estimated the cost to the City over ten years will be $21,000 in fees and $39,000 in excise and franchise taxes on utilities. He believed this proposal would prompt increased redevelopment in the area. He felt the City would see a net gain in ad valorem taxes over the entire 10 years. Commissioner Thomas expressed concern that the City would identify a large chunk of real estate where no taxes would be collected and the cost to the City to provide services there skyrockets. Mayor Garvey questioned if every census block indicated was being proposed for inclusion. Mr. Ferri said the enterprise zone must be one contiguous area. He noted staff's preliminary numbers indicate a net gain in ad valorem taxes over the ten years because of a sliding scale. He said the enterprise zone development agency will follow the State Statute. Commissioner Thomas felt staff's numbers were make believe. He said when taxes are eliminated and expenses skyrocket, the City is stuck and has no control if revenues are inadequate. He expressed concern about approving the total qualifying area. Mr. Baker noted Commissioner Thomas' concern that the City would be unable to collect additional taxes if the program is extremely successful, and pointed out that one cannot assume that successful redevelopment would occur without the program. He said the plan is needed because these areas are falling apart. Commissioner Thomas questioned if a smaller area of real estate could be considered. Mr. Ferri said the Commission can designate any qualifying areas it chooses. CRA Executive Director Peter Gozza referred to the qualifying sections in the defined redevelopment area. He expressed concern that no CRA members are on the committee. He said it is illogical to have a tax abatement program in a tax increment financing district. mincc01 d.95 39 01/19/95 Commissioner Fitzgerald noted the issue is time sensitive. Commissioner Deegan said the language in the resolution refers to the "possible creation" of the enterprise zone with boundaries which "may include" certain census blocks. He indicated the enterprise zone does not have to be identified today. Mr. Ferri agreed. The final shape is up to the City Commission. Commissioner Deegan noted not much happened in the City's previous enterprise zone. He agreed with the concept and endorsed getting this on the ballot. If the citizens approve the ad valorem tax exemption, then the Commission can choose the zone's boundaries. Mayor Garvey questioned if the City could concentrate on a portion of the zone if it submitted all of the blocks. Mr. Ferri said the same incentives would have to be available throughout the district. The designation is for ten years and the same block cannot be designated twice. Commissioner Berfield said if the Commission approves the item for referendum, the area will not be identified tonight. She expressed concern that the Commission was wasting time discussing individual blocks tonight. She questioned if the Commission wants to go to referendum. Commissioner Thomas said he was convinced to go forward. Commissioner Berfield moved to provide for a referendum to grant authority to give ad valorem tax exemptions should an Enterprise Zone be approved. The motion was duly seconded. Scott Geigel said this proposal would invite more people to open businesses in the City and create more jobs. Mayor Garvey agreed the issue is about jobs and opportunities. Roger Woodruff, representing Arnold-Brown Properties, read a letter from Lee Arnold dated January 19, 1995, referencing the proposed enterprise zone. He indicated Arnold- Brown Properties is marketing a property at the corner of Garden and Myrtle which is not included in the enterprise zone. Mr. Arnold indicated he did not endorse an enterprise zone with properties within its borders not included in the zone. If all property within the boundaries of the enterprise zone cannot be included, he recommended the Commission delay their decision. Mayor Garvey questioned why one block is not included in the zone. Mr. Ferri indicated that block does not meet the threshold criteria established by the State and cannot be included. Mr. Woodruff said it seems bizarre that the boundaries will create a distinct disadvantage to the marketability of a property across the street from or surrounded by the enterprise zone. Commissioner Thomas said he did not believe any part of the CRA district should be included in the enterprise zone. Mayor Garvey recommended starting the process by putting it to referendum. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney presented Resolution #95-10 and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Resolution #95-10 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: mincc01 d.95 40 01/19/95 "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey. "Nays": None. ITEM #49 - Res. #95-8 - providing for public sale of not to exceed $12.5-million Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1995 to finance the construction & other costs of the new Police Station (FN) Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1995, for $12.5-million will finance the construction and related furniture and equipment needs of the police station portion and one- half of the parking facility of the municipal services/public safety and police complex. This issue was validated in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, in and for Pinellas County, Florida. The ruling was filed in favor of the City of October 6, 1994. An appeal, filed within the 30-day appeal period, delayed the scheduled sale of bonds. It is anticipated the appeal will be resolved and the City will be free to issue the bonds soon. This issue will be sold through competitive public sale scheduled for a date and time to be selected by the Finance Director based upon the resolution of the appeal, finalization of bond ratings and insurance, and satisfactory market conditions. Current plans are to repay the bonds over 30 years. A pledge of Public Service Tax Revenues will be used to secure payment of the principal and interest on the bonds. Adoption of this resolution authorizes the public sale and award of the bonds to the bidder offering such interest rate(s) and purchase price which will produce the lowest true interest cost to the City over the life of the Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1995. The City Attorney presented Resolution #95-8 and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned how much the debt service will cost. Finance Director Margaret Simmons estimated the cost at $880,000 per year. David Thornton with Raymond James said that amount includes principal and interest. Commissioner Thomas questioned what interest rate is anticipated for sale of the bonds. Mr. Thornton said they will be run at a true interest cost of 6.54 overall. The range is from 5% on the short end to 6.55%. The total interest paid over the life of the bond issue will be approximately $14,743,000. Ms. Simmons said in the first year the City would pay $728,000 in interest and $150,000 principal. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Resolution #95-8 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 - First Reading Ord. #5721-95 - re Standard Housing Code, amending Sec. 49.02 of City Code and Sec. 103.2 of Standard Housing Code, 1991 Edition, relating to unsafe buildings and repealing Secs. 49.04 & 49.05 of City Code relating to notices, public hearings and Commission action. (C) mincc01 d.95 41 01/19/95 The proposed changes, endorsed by the Code Enforcement Review Task Force (CERTaF), will allow the City to increase effectiveness in enforcing the Housing Code. A summary of the changes are: 1) Section 103.2.1 defines unfit, unsafe and nuisance structures; 2) Section 103.2.2 sets time limits requiring a structure to comply with the Housing Code. Adds a paragraph limiting the time a structure can remain boarded up; 3) Section 103.2.4 sets the guidelines in determining when a structure is a minor or major violation; 4) Section 105 is deleted, eliminates hardship as a reason to appeal the City's decision; 5) Section 106.1 defines the appeal rights of the structure's owner; 6) Section 106.2 sets up the procedure to take the case to Municipal Code Enforcement Board, and take corrective action; 7) Section 106.4 gives the City Manager the ability to defer corrective action in an owner/occupant is applying for a rehab loan from Community Development; 8) Section 202 adds a definition for an abandoned building and amends the definition for an abandoned vehicle; 9) Section 308.3 clarifies the number of occupants served by a single bathroom facility in a rooming house; and 10) Section 308.8 clarifies the definition of a rooming house. Vic Chodora, Assistant Director of Central Permitting, said this proposed ordinance includes in the City Code, modifications to the 1991 edition of the Standard Housing Code published by the Southern Building Code Congress. In 1992, the Commission adopted the code. The ordinance clarifies language and definitions and defines owners' appeal rights. The Mayor indicated the proposed ordinance combines changes in building code with recommendations from the CERTaF. Mr. Chodora agreed. Commissioner Thomas questioned if these changes would tighten City code so a situation similar to the Ice House would not occur again. Mr. Chodora said the changes will allow the City to take quick action. Mayor Garvey said when Governor Chiles was in town, he had questioned if the State could help the City move forward on Code Enforcement. She recommended contacting the Governor's office with any ideas on how the State can help cities facilitate code enforcement. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the proposed amendments to Chapter 49, Standard Housing Code. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5721-95 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5721-95 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 #51 - Sidewalk Vendor and Outdoor Cafe Ordinance - Issues (previous ordinance re this topic, #5658-94 withdrawn 11/17/94) (CP) The City Manager questioned, due to the lateness of the hour, if the Commission wanted to discuss this item at this meeting. mincc01 d.95 42 01/19/95 Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item until January 30, 1995. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #52 - Other Pendina Matters a) HDR Engineering, Inc. - Memorial Causeway Bridge Feasibility Study The first citizens' information meeting for the Memorial Causeway Bridge Feasibility Study was held December 7, 1994 at the Beach Civic Center with approximately 50 citizens, City staff, representatives of HDR Engineering, Peter Gozza of the CRA, and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). City Engineer Rich Baier indicated the Island Estates Civic Association and Pierce 100 residents understand the need for the bridge. Major concerns include: aesthetics; noise impacts to Coachman Park; provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists; project's cost; and access to Pierce 100 Condominiums. HDR presented their Memorial Causeway Bridge Feasibility Study status report. The Study's purpose was to evaluate feasibility of replacing the existing bridge with a high-level fixed bridge or a higher bascule (draw) bridge and to review the three alternate corridors of Drew Street, Cleveland Street, and Pierce Boulevard. The scope of this study is to evaluate alternate concepts (a future PD&E study will look at detailed impact of a preferred alternative). FDOT is a cooperating and reviewing agency. Engineering factors to be evaluated include: 1) traffic flow impacts and maintenance of boat & vehicular traffic during construction; 2) lane and typical section requirements; 3) access to businesses and "access management"; 4) geometric requirements for navigation; 5) construction, right-of-way, and business damage costs; 6) impacts on utilities; 7) Alternate structure types and span lengths; and 8) economic analysis of bascule versus fixed-span bridge. Environmental factors to be evaluated include: 1) impacts to Wetlands and submerged habitat; 2) impacts to public spaces (parks, recreation areas); 3) water quality impacts; 4) permitting requirements; 5) feasibility of channel relocation; 6) noise impacts; and 7) visual impacts & compatibility with surroundings. Public input to be evaluated includes feedback from citizens, merchants, the City Commission and others. Progress to date includes: 33% complete with Engineering Data Collection; 13% complete with Environmental Data Collection & Evaluation; 5% complete with Traffic Analysis; 5% complete with Alternative Analysis; and 20% complete with Public Involvement. A second public meeting is scheduled in early March and a second presentation will be made to the City Commission in mid-May. Douglas Butler, Senior Project Manager with HDR Engineering, presented the status report. He requested input regarding ideas for the corridor. He asked that the Commissioners mark aerial photos with recommendations and forward their concepts to the City Engineer. The preliminary report will be submitted to the Commission during the second presentation in May. He said they are reviewing various combinations of roadways and ramping. Mayor Garvey said she was pleasantly surprised to learn that some opposition to the project disappeared once it was explained. City Engineer Rich Baier said some opposition mincc01 d.95 43 01/19/95 was based on misconceptions and misinformation. He indicated the City is not planning to eliminate any of the causeway or landscaping. Mayor Garvey thanked Mr. Butler for his presentation. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve extending the meeting past 12:00 midnight. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioners Berfield, Deegan and Thomas voted "Aye"; Commissioner Fitzgerald and Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried. b) Proposed Lease for Pickles Plus Too, a restaurant, to be located on first floor of the Harborview Center (CRA) The proposed lease for Pickles Plus Too would include the following terms, in addition to the City's standard lease requirements: 1) A seven-year lease with two three-year options; 2) Build-out will be paid by the City and limited to $100,000. The City will be reimbursed for 50% of the build-out expense to be paid at $3 per square foot over the initial seven-year lease term; 3) Common Area Maintenance is $2 per square foot; 4) Base rent is $10 per square foot with a 3% annual increase in base rent; 5) 6% of the annual gross sales over $575,000 will be paid to the City; 6) First three months will be rent-free; 7) A guarantee that the City would insure that lease adjustments would be made should Stein Mart vacate the Harborview Center and terminate their lease. This document should also reflect that the City would have eight months to restore a tenant equal to Stein Mart in the vacant area or Pickles Plus Too, at its option, may terminate its lease and be completely released from any and all lease financial responsibilities. Mayor Garvey pointed out this is a concept paper, not a lease. Peter Gozza reported staff has been working with Pickles Plus, which has a location in Northwood Plaza, to develop terms for a lease. Commissioner Fitzgerald said he is a patron of Pickles Plus. He indicated a philosophical problem with the proposal that the City will pay for the build out but will only be reimbursed for 50% of the costs. He pointed out no interest on this investment will come back to the taxpayers. He did not think residents should pay taxes to support a private business. He felt taxpayer's money should be invested where it will earn a return. Mayor Garvey questioned what guarantee the City will have to recoup its money if Pickles Plus leaves in a few years after the City has invested $100,000. Mr. Gozza said repayment of $50,000 is guaranteed whether Pickles Plus stays or not. He said this type of incentive is similar to what is being proposed for the enterprise zone. The Mayor said there needs to be some kind of guarantee. Joe Benedettini, of Pickles Plus, said he and his partners were not concerned with agreeing to a guarantee as long as it was structured properly. He noted they, too, were putting themselves at risk. Mayor Garvey suggested a percentage of the $50,000 could be forgiven after five years and provide the restaurant with the inventive to remain. The City Manager questioned if the Commission would consider reducing the time to payback the $50,000 to a five-year lease from a seven-year one. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the owners would agree to mincc01 d.95 44 01/19/95 leaving the option prices open and later base them on the success of the restaurant and center. Mr. Benedettini felt a reasonable agreement should be negotiated ahead of time. Commissioner Thomas noted the City is sharing in the risk and should share in the reward since the City is shouldering 50% of the capital improvement risk. Mr. Benedettini said the rewards will flow from the 6% over the predetermined volume. Commissioner Thomas liked the five-year concept with several five year renewal options. If the venture is successful, he recommended increasing the rent during the sixth and seventh year enough to recover the City's $100,000 investment. He felt $16 a square foot for the first five years was a fair rate. Commissioner Thomas did not know if Pickles Plus' proposition to pay 6% of gross sales over $575,000 was fair. He requested staff to meet with the owners regarding the $575,000 figure. He said staff should be informed regarding the sales levels at Pickles Plus. Mr. Benedettini said, based on their present location, Pickles Plus should start paying the City a percentage by the ninth or tenth month. Commissioner Thomas requested Mr. Benedettini review these figures with staff to be certain the number has value. Commissioner Thomas said he had no problem with the three months of free rent or the escape clause should Stein Mart vacate the Center. He noted the City is also looking to this restaurant to cater the lower trade show floor. Commissioner Deegan referred to the figures on the back of the agenda cover sheet and indicated the base over which a percentage is paid is also important. He noted other leaseholds pay 10% of sales over a predetermined amount and recommended staff review the percentage as well as the base. The City Manager clarified that this proposed lease was for a 2,500 square foot, self- contained restaurant. A contract to provide food service for the trade show space will be handled by separate agreement. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if outside seating is included in the square footage. It was indicated the space is internal. Commissioner Thomas noted the building is not designed for outside restaurant service. Patrons can carry their orders outside. Commissioner Deegan questioned if the name of the restaurant will be Pickles Plus Too. Mr. Benedettini said that was correct. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if staff will come back to the Commission with a lease for approval. Mr. Gozza said the purpose of tonight's meeting is to determine if the City Commission is interested in negotiating with Pickles Plus using the concepts outlined. Commissioner Thomas requested that a personal guarantee and performance bond be included in the lease. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if no one else was interested in the return on taxpayer's money. Commissioner Thomas indicated the citizens will get a return on their investment. mincc01 d.95 45 01/19/95 Commissioner Thomas moved to approve in concept these terms of the Pickles Plus Too proposal as discussed and amended and to authorize City Staff to prepare the lease. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioner Fitzgerald said he did not agree with the proposal and did not support the City's investment of $100,000 in the restaurant. Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield, Deegan, and Thomas and Mayor Garvey voted "Aye"; Commissioner Fitzgerald voted "Nay." Motion carried. c) Amend contract with Rice, Williams Associates to expand scope of service to include transfer of ownership analysis and to increase compensation to a maximum of $82,000 (CM) On October 4, 1993, the Commission approved a contract with Rice, Williams Associates for cable franchise renewal consulting services. The total project budget approved was $50,000. The scope of services included: initial consultation; community needs assessment and consumer market survey; analysis of compliance and ordinance development; technical analysis; development of request for renewal proposal; evaluation of renewal proposal; assistance with negotiations; and attendance at public hearings. The scope of services was increased to include rate regulation analysis. Tasks included in the scope of service have been completed with the following exceptions: rate regulations' analysis; compliance analysis; and franchise negotiations are ongoing. Vision Cable of Pinellas, Inc. has requested that the City approve transfer of ownership of the cable franchise to Time Warner-Advance/Newhouse Partnership. This request has added an additional complication to the franchise renewal process. Rice, Williams Associates has estimated the time and cost needed to complete franchise negotiations and analyze the request for transfer to be $32,000. A first quarter budget amendment will provide for the transfer of $32,000 from the unappropriated retained earnings of the general fund to provide funding for this contract increase. This will increase the current project budget from $50,000 to $82,000. Time Warner will be asked to reimburse these consulting costs to the City as part of the franchise agreement. Commissioner Fitzgerald noted this week GTE won the right to expand fiber optic and cable services in Clearwater in a Virginia federal court. He questioned how that decision will affect the City's negotiations with Vision Cable and if anything new should be included in the Vision Cable franchise agreement. Information Management Director Jeff Harper indicated GTE won the right to offer video dial tone that is similar to current pay-for-view channels and will compete with Vision Cable. He noted there was a question if the City had any franchising authority over this service. The issue remained unsettled in Congress. Commissioner Fitzgerald said these issues need to be factored into negotiations with Vision Cable. He questioned if this request for $32,000 included a review of this issue. The City Attorney indicated it did not. Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if it should. Mr. Harper said he did not know. The City Attorney said staff may need to come back and ask for help regarding this should it become a real issue. mincc01 d.95 46 01/19/95 Deputy City Manager Kathy Rice said the City was not negotiating an exclusive contract with Vision Cable. Mr. Harper stated that another cable company could approach the City and request a franchise. Mayor Garvey questioned if there are plans to bury cable lines. Ms. Rice indicated that issue is being discussed. Commissioner Thomas expressed serious concern regarding Rice Williams. He noted Rice Williams has made a great deal of money during the company's 18 months on board but has provided a pathetic level of service. He said he could not be more critical of a company's performance. He indicated the City Commission learned next to nothing from this organization at a time the Commission should have been kept informed. He was very unsatisfied with the audit of Vision Cable's revenues. Mr. Rice said staff has taken the lead in discussing Rice William's performance and improvements have been noted. Mr. Harper said he was not thrilled with their service. He noted staff had targeted the completion of this contract for August or September 1994. He reported that five of the seven items included in the original agreement had been completed. He indicated Rice Williams' product is good although it has not been as prompt as the City would have liked. Service has improved since staff complained about Rice Williams' level of response. He said the City ran into problems following two face to face negotiating sessions with Vision Cable. Both sides asked each other for detailed information following the last meeting on October 13, 1994. Engineers from Rice Williams and Vision Cable have discussed the issues including the proposed rebuilding of the system. On October 26, 1994, the City was notified of the proposed Time Warner buy out. The City has thirty days to respond to this proposal and does not have the necessary expertise on staff to evaluate it. Commissioner Thomas pointed out the Commission does not have to approve the Time Warner acquisition. He had serious reservations regarding Vision Cable's financial performance and suggested that was just cause to allow the City to rebid the whole contact. The City's current contract states the City is owed a franchise fee of 3% of Vision Cable's gross revenue. Commissioner Thomas did not believe the City has received a penny from Vision Cable's advertising income, programming, etc. He said the City can negotiate with other cable companies. Mr. Harper indicated Rice Williams had not been contracted to perform a financial audit. Mayor Garvey recommended Commissioners express their concerns to staff in private conversation. Commissioner Deegan noted he had brought up this issue on January 17, 1995, because he did not know where negotiations stood. He suggested the Commission needs to advise staff of their wishes regarding this contract before Rice Williams and staff have worked out contractual details with Vision Cable. He felt more than private discussions are needed and recommended staff come back to the Commission before negotiations proceed much further. Commissioner Deegan questioned when the City formally requested a time extension to address this. Ms. Rice said staff sent a written request for an extension but are not certain it will be granted. She indicated staff needs to be assured all issues with Vision Cable have been covered if the City approves the transfer of ownership. mincc01 d.95 47 01/19/95 Commissioner Deegan noted if the Commission does not approve the transfer, it happens automatically. Ms. Rice said the Commission can decide to deny it but if it does nothing, the transfer is automatically approved. Mr. Harper said the results of the compliance audit should be available on January 23, 1995. Commissioner Deegan questioned who will perform the financial audit. The City Manager said Internal Audit Director Dan Katsiyiannis has done an audit of billings. She indicated he will revisit Commissioner Thomas' concern regarding programming and advertising revenue. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the City is not negotiating with the wrong person by trying to get questions answered by Vision Cable when Vision Cable is Time-Warner. Mr. Harper said the City needs to know what questions need to be addressed by both companies. Ms. Rice said staff wants to be certain the transfer documents are legally defensible and all important issues have been covered. Staff has concerns regarding Time Warner's financial background. She indicated many outstanding issues will be addressed. If the contract is not set up properly, they may be able to legally avoid many compliance issues. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the City does not approve the transfer if new companies could be invited to bid. The City Attorney said the City must have reasons for not approving the transfer. She said the City must identify outstanding compliance issues so no issues are waived in the transfer. Mr. Harper said if the City denies the transfer, the company would meet with the City to work out problems to obtain approval. The company could take the City to court for being unreasonable or Vision Cable could be allowed to continue as Vision Cable with little support from its parent company. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the law requires the City to renew the franchise. Mr. Harper said under FCC regulations, the City must give first chance to Vision Cable. If the City does not award Vision Cable a franchise, the City would be required to hold an administrative hearing to state this intention. The matter would then go to Federal Court. He said the issue is confused by language in the existing contract that states the City's refusal to approve the transfer could result in the forfeiture of the franchise. The City Manager indicated she will try to agenda this item for January 30, 1995. Commissioner Thomas moved to amend the contract with Rice, Williams Associates to expand the scope of service to include transfer of ownership analysis and to increase the compensation to Rice, Williams Associates from $50,000 to a maximum of $82,000 and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. d) Purchase of three 1995 Chevrolet 1/4 ton Maxi-cab Pickuo Trucks Bids were solicited and received for the purchase of three 1/4-ton maxi cab pickup trucks. Sunshine Chevrolet-Oldsmobile of Tarpon Springs, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Replacement of these three vehicles was scheduled for FY 1994/95 and was approved by the City Commission during the FY 1994/95 budget hearings. The Water Division requests changes to two of their replacement vehicles: downgrade 3/4-ton utility body pickup to 1/4-ton pickup with maxi cab and substitute a cargo van for a 1/4-ton pickup with maxi cab. The Water Division will fund these $437 modifications. mincc01 d.95 48 01/19/95 Commissioner Thomas questioned if the proposed purchase ties in with the existing fleet of equipment. General Services Director Bill Baird noted the severe shortages of fleet vehicles this year and the anticipated large price increases. He has set standardization aside for the time being to obtain the needed vehicles. Commissioner Thomas moved to award a contract to Sunshine Chevrolet-Oldsmobile of Tarpon Springs, Inc., Tarpons Springs, FL, for the purchase of three 1995 Chevrolet 1/4-ton maxi-cab pickup trucks, at a cost of $44,937 ($14,979/each), which is the lowest, most responsive and responsible bid submitted in accordance with specifications; financing to be provided under the City's master lease-purchase agreement with Barnett Bank of Pinellas County and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #53 - Resolutions CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS a) Res. #95-9 - Assessing property owners the costs of mowing/clearing owners' lots The City Attorney presented Resolution #95-9 and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass and adopt Resolution #95-9 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. #95-14 - Amending Res. #94-52's Schedule of Fees for "planning related items"; establishing a fee for appeals to the Commission The City Attorney presented Resolution #95-14 and read it by title only. Commissioner Deegan moved to pass and adopt Resolution #95-14 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 #54 - Other City Attorney Items - None ITEM #55 - City Manager Verbal Reports The City Manager referred to Commissioner Deegan's memorandum regarding the request from the Clearwater Branch of the American Association of University Women (AAUW) for $1,000 to sponsor the March 25, 1995 conference, Girls +Math +Science = Success. He said this would show the City's support for educational opportunities. The Mayor wished to obtain more information regarding this request. Commissioner Deegan said he spoke with the organization at length and they indicated twice as many students as anticipated mincc01 d.95 49 01/19/95 had expressed an interest in participating. He said this would be tied to the community's expressed concern to improve education. The Mayor said she understood the AAUW request as she has been active with the organization for many years. She expressed concerns regarding giving money to the group without double checking other options. She indicated she would rather encourage private donations to this effort and provide in-kind services. Commissioner Deegan said the money could come from the funds remaining from the summer youth training program. He noted this is a one time event. He felt the program will provide long range benefits. Mayor Garvey said although had been a member of AAUW for 27 years, she did not necessarily believe that government should be involved with this project. She wished to talk with the leadership to see if there was another way the City could help. Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a grant of $1,000 to the American Association of University Women to sponsor the March 25, 1995 conference, Girls +Math +Science = Success. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioner Berfield said she assumed Commissioner Deegan spoke with an AAUW member who convinced him the program was worthwhile. She noted the event meets the City's stated goals and objectives. Commissioner Deegan indicated he spoke with an AAUW representative. Commissioner Berfield noted the program would help young people. She questioned if the City Manager had located the requested funds. Mayor Garvey said there were a number of AAUW members she would like to talk with and indicated there was no need for the Commission to take action on this issue tonight. Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield, Deegan and Thomas voted "Aye"; Commissioner Fitzgerald and Mayor Garvey voted "Nay." Motion carried. ITEM #56 - Commission Discussion Items - None. ITEM #57 - Other Commission Action Commissioner Deegan said he did not know of any other government meeting where the flag is saluted prior to the invocation. Mayor Garvey questioned if there was a reason to change. Commissioner Deegan felt the creator should be honored before the flag. Mayor Garvey felt there was no reason to change the agenda order. Commissioner Thomas said the point was which action comes first and noted prayer come first at other meetings. Commissioner Fitzgerald did not think it made any difference. The majority agreed to reverse the order of the Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation on the agenda. ITEM #58 - Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 1:04 a.m., January 20, 1995. mincc01 d.95 50 01/19/95