Loading...
11/04/1991 CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 4, 1991 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Sue Berfield Vice-Mayor/Commissioner (10:05 a.m.) Lee Regulski Commissioner William Nunamaker Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner Also present were: Michael J. Wright City Manager M. A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney (10:05 a.m.) Mary K. Diana Assistant City Clerk The Mayor called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. and the following items were discussed: Special Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance No. 5142-91 - Amending Ordinance No. 3205-83 for Proposed Change of Use of Land to an Already Approved Development of Regional Impact (DRI) for the Park Place Development The Commission agreed at its October 17, 1991 meeting to hold a special public hearing on this item due to time constraints faced by the developer. The actions required to permit industrial/research and development land uses in the Park Place development of regional impact (DRI) are (1) approval of the change to the development order as part of the notice of proposed change hearing to allow (a) the substitution of 200,000 square feet of industrial development for 300,000 square feet of office development and (b) the extension of the buildout date for the project from 1991 until 1996; and (2) amendment to the zoning and land use classification for the property. Staff feels the proposed changes do not constitute a substantial deviation since service impacts are lessened from the original level of development allowed under the original DRI approval and the applicant has demonstrated reasonable progress, given market conditions, in proceeding with the continued development of the site. The Commission previously passed first reading Ordinances Nos. 5113-91 and 5114-91 on August 15, 1991, amending the zoning and land use classification for approximately 50 acres of the 99.1 acre site. The applicant has now submitted actual concept plans for the development and a reduction of the amount of area to be rezoned/reclassified is warranted since the applicant intends to utilize only 21.3 acres for industrial use. Planning & Development Director James Polatty reported a revised development order was received late Friday afternoon from the applicant. He said some of the Park Place off-site improvements of the original three phases have been completed and the applicant is offering to accelerate payment of the transportation mitigation impact fees to the City with the interest being calculated from the date of the issuance of the development order to within 90 days after second reading of the amending ordinance. Timothy Johnson, attorney representing the owner, Buildings Operation Holding Company, and Storz Ophthalmic's Incorporated, the buyer of the property, extended his appreciation to the City for their cooperation in this project. He said the notice of proposed change is being filed to accommodate a 200,000 square foot light manufacturing facility which manufactures interocular lenses. He noted for the record that by asking for the extension the applicant was not waiving his legal rights even if this extension is not necessary. This request has been reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Board twice and approval has been unanimously recommended. A traffic analysis has been prepared by King Engineering and submitted to the City and regulatory agencies to evaluate the impact due to the reduction in square footage, the change of use and the postponement of the build-out on traffic. As a result of this study, a new development order has been submitted to the City. He indicated, when a notice of proposed change is filed, the precise language needs to be included in the development order. A revised ordinance has been reviewed by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC). The DCA has approved it with minor changes. These changes have been made and sent to the City, the region and the state. The DCA still has questions and the TBRPC has raised several about the traffic study. It was felt these questions, however, will not change the result of the traffic study. He distributed the order which included changes requested by the DCA. Mr. Johnson requested the development order, rezoning and the land use plan ordinances all be scheduled for second reading on December 19, 1991. He said the site plan included with the annexation agreement that was part of the original order adopted for the Park Place DRI is proposed to be revised and it will be necessary to make a substitution. He said in working with the regulatory agencies there may be some additional changes requested to the development order to satisfy concerns. Most of these changes would relate to transportation and they could be made prior to second reading of the ordinance. In response to a question, the City Attorney said ordinances can be amended prior to second reading if the scope of the ordinance is not expanded. Joe Kubicki, transportation director at King Engineering, indicated transportation was a key issue to the City and a professional team assisted in the impact assessment of this project. He said replacing 300,000 square feet of office development with 200,000 square feet of light industrial will significantly lower the trip generation rate and additional impact on regional roadways is not anticipated. In response to questions, Mr. Kubicki indicated the original development order relied heavily on transportation systems management and allowed a high percentage of credit for flex time and peak hour adjustments. For this analysis, these type credits were deleted, therefore the project was assessed at a higher impact than before. It was felt the previous method over reduced the impact of the project. Donna Foster, representing the DCA, said she wanted to reserve the right to appeal if necessary. The changes in the original notice of proposed change submitted to the DCA were presumed to be substantial deviations; however, the developer provided evidence to rebut the presumption. Last week the DCA was sent the revised development order which included the elimination of the transportation systems management plan and her agency has not had sufficient time to determine whether this change constitutes a substantial deviation. In response to a question, she indicated it takes approximately 30 days to review a change. Susan Cooper, TBRPC coordinator, stated their concerns basically focus on transportation. She said since the development was approved in steps the applicant is actually asking for an extension of up to eleven years for part of this project which places it into a presumed to be a substantial deviation category. TBRPC is looking for a traffic analysis to show what the difference in the buildout of the years of the project means in terms of estimating the impact of the project. She said there was no problem with eliminating the transportation systems management plan and providing a revised analysis. The subphasing of the project is based on trips and it was suggested the phasing scenario be tied to square footage rather than trips. It is presumed to be a substantial deviation and by doing this analysis the applicant is attempting to rebut that presumption. She said the roadway network is now different due to changes and they want to get the correct analysis. A question was raised, if projecting this project so far into the future would adversely affect a new project in this area, and the City Manager indicated capacity has already been reserved. This capacity may be reduced but not expanded and this change should not impact any other projects in the area as traffic impacts have already been considered. Concern was expressed if the project does not go through, there is a traffic reserve on hold. It was indicated a number of DRIs in the region have gone to phased approvals and with new DRIs each phase is analyzed separately. Gordon Schiff, representing Metropolitan Life Insurance, owner of a portion of the DRI property but not part of the request, expressed concerns that Metropolitan Life have no new exposure to mitigation requirements generated by this amendment or to the proportionate share payment; they retain the development rights that currently exist on this property including no transfer of those development rights onto other portions of the DRI property and that the development order be clear in that Metropolitan Life will retain its ability to develop without any additional reviews or conditions than previously existed. He said Mr. Johnson indicated language is to be included to address these concerns; however, if such language does not occur, Met Life wants to reserve their right to appeal. Mr. Schiff said he had not seen the latest development order; however, he did not feel it would change their position. He requested the amended order be rendered to Metropolitan if and when approved. A question was raised as to whether any change in zoning is being anticipated for the remaining piece of property that is not part of this request and it was indicated not at this time. It is felt the requested extension would be beneficial because it would be known exactly what would be developed in the area and give all owners the flexibility to move forward with their projects. Mr. Johnson assured the current owner of the property has no intention of adversely affecting Met Life and is confident all the issues of concern will be resolved. He encouraged the Commission to pass the ordinance amending the development order. Concern was also expressed regarding future changes in zoning affecting the traffic count and Mr. Johnson indicated, if a zoning change is to be made, a new application would need to be filed and would also have to go through the DRI process. There was concern expressed regarding adverse impacts on public facilities such as water, wastewater, drainage, solid waste, recreation, noise pollution, air quality, etc. Mr. Polatty said these issues have been addressed in the new research/development/office ordinance and the DRI process contains safeguards. Mr. Johnson said along with the transportation study a response to such issues was submitted to the City and reviewed by staff. He said air quality is largely a function of transportation and emissions from the facility are restricted by the new zoning ordinance. A question was raised regarding whether any disagreeable odors would be emitted into the atmosphere. John Pelk, Director of Operations of Storz Ophthalmic's Incorporated, indicated they have had a similar facility located on Ft. Harrison Avenue and Hamlet Avenue surrounded by residential areas since 1979. He assured there were no disagreeable odors emitted and said they are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration as well as other regulatory agencies for compliance. Mr. Pelk said occupants of Park Place have viewed this site and he has answered any questions they may have had. The design plans for the new site will keep the wooded areas as they presently exist and recyclable materials will be used when possible. He felt the site would be very attractive. Discussion ensued in regard to the revised ordinance distributed today and some concern was expressed by the Commission they have not had an opportunity to review it thoroughly. The City Attorney said a motion to amend can be done at second reading. There was discussion regarding the proposal using trips as the controlling factor in requesting an extension of time. It was felt the use of trips was too flexible a foundation upon which to base the order. Mr. Johnson said that both proposals use trips with the one distributed today using a lower number. The City Attorney said all changes will be incorporated into the second reading ordinance. Commissioner Regulski moved to approve the proposed modification of the Development Order for Park Place and called for the reading of Ordinance #5142-91. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5142-91 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Nunamaker moved to pass Ordinance #5142-91 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Regulski, Nunamaker, Fitzgerald, Berfield and Garvey. "Nays": None. Contribution of $250,000 to the Long Center representing the City's fourth and final installment towards the center's capital construction funding During the later part of 1988, the Commission approved, subject to annual appropriations, a one million dollar contribution to the Center Foundation (Long Center) for construction purposes. Of this amount, three payments of $250,000 each have been made, one on October 5, 1988, one on October 11, 1989, and another on October 5, 1990. Mr. Fred Fisher, Chairman Emeritus of the Center Foundation's Board of Trustees, requests the City to pay its fourth and final installment of $250,000. As approved for last year's payment, funding for this request is available in the Special Development Fund. In response to a question, the City Manager stated the Special Development Fund has a cash balance and money is appropriated out of that fund for special projects. This contribution was not part of this year's budget process; however, was part of Parks & Recreation's budget until last year. Commissioner Regulski moved to approve the City's contribution of $250,000 to the "Long Center" representing the City's fourth and final installment toward the center's capital construction funding. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Purchase of vacant commercial land located at the SE corner of Gulfview Dr. & Clearwater Pass Ave. from James E. Standridge for $700,000 and specified closing costs of $21,951 for use in the new Clearwater Pass Bridge project The purchase of the subject property is for use in the new Clearwater Pass Bridge project and contains 26,379 square feet m.o.l. A portion of the property will be used for the new bridge approach right-of-way. The remainder is to be used for street alignment and parking replacement for land to be taken from the adjoining Leverock's property. Two MAI appraisals were obtained with one coming in at $600,000 and the other at $685,000. Lee Arnold and Associates reported the property was under contract for sale for $700,000 in 1988. The contract did not close because bank financing failed due to elevated contaminant levels in the soil, which were revealed by an environmental audit. Staff concludes the current market value of this property lies between $650,000 and $685,000. The seller has agreed to sell the property for $700,000 with the City paying for title insurance, state documentary stamps on the deed, cost of appraisals and 1991 real property taxes. The total cost of these additional items is estimated to be $21,951. A Department of Transportation representative states should eminent domain procedures be necessary, the cost could run as high as $50,000 to $150,000. The property requires clean-up of petroleum contamination. Florida Statute allows for reimbursement of responsible party costs for site rehabilitation through funds from the Inland Protection Trust Fund. The seller has entered into an agreement with Gurr & Associates, Inc. of Lakeland, Florida, to do the clean up and receive the reimbursement of rehabilitation costs. Additionally, the seller is entering into an agreement with the City to place $200,000 of the sale price into an escrow account assuring that the clean up will be done properly. Gurr & Associates have estimated the cost of the clean up to be between $170,000 to $200,000 and will take between two and three years to complete. Public Works Director Bill Baker explained what is being proposed reporting the new bridge will be built adjacent to the existing bridge and will be configured into two lanes with wide emergency lanes, a sidewalk and bicycle extension. The proposal will affect the Leverock Seafood Restaurant and a vacant parcel of land belonging to Mr. Standridge. He showed an aerial photograph of the area extending from Sand Key across the existing bridge to Leverock's on Clearwater Beach and pointed out the Standridge property. He said the existing right-of-way will be changed with Leverock's losing about 33 parking spaces and access from Gulf Boulevard. He said the Standridge property is for sale and felt it could be obtained for a fair price and used in negotiations with Leverock. In response to a question, it was indicated the attorneys for Leverock have been contacted. A question was raised as to what is intended for that portion of the Standridge property that will not be reconfigured for Leverock and it was indicated it could be sold for development at a future date. Discussion ensued in regard to the subject property being contaminated and it was indicated Mr. Standridge accepts the responsibility of giving the City a clean piece of property. He has already made arrangements with the state and will be reimbursed for cleaning the property. A contract has been signed to have the property cleaned. Recognizing that the state may not pay for clean-up costs, $200,000 will be put in escrow for this purpose. Mr. Baker said service station contaminations are fairly simple to clean-up and attaining a level of cleanliness takes approximately 2-3 years. He indicated the property can be used in the meantime for purposes not in conflict with the cleaning process; however, the contaminated soil must first be removed. It was indicated the Department of Environmental Resources (DER) will oversee the cleansing exercise. Concern was expressed in purchasing this property before receiving a guarantee from Leverock that they would agree to the proposal. It was indicated if they do not agree, the City would be forced to negotiate for the Leverock property. Discussion ensued in regard to paying more for the property than its appraisal value especially if there is no assurance that Leverock will accept the proposal. It was indicated paying the higher price might be worth it if the purchase resulted in an expedient solution to the total problem. Due to concerns regarding whether the proposed approach would work, this item was pulled and will be brought back at a later date. Discussion of lawsuit - City vs. Stowell This lawsuit involves a complaint filed by the City of Clearwater relating to the right to access an easement for maintenance work. The City Attorney said he wished to keep the Commission informed of the status of this lawsuit. He will be arranging to meet with the appropriate parties to try and negotiate a settlement. He will report back to the Commission at the meeting of November 21st. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m.