Loading...
06/04/1996PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER June 4, 1996 Present: Jay Keyes Brenda Harris Nixon Edward Mazur (arrived 2:02 p.m.) Kemper Merriam Robert D. Bickerstaffe Bernie Baron Frank Kunnen (arrived 2:15 p.m.) Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member   Scott Shuford Leslie Dougall-Sides Gwen Legters Central Permitting Director Assistant City Attorney Board Reporter   To provide continuity, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 2:00 p.m. in City Hall, followed by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. He outlined meeting procedures and the appeal process. Minutes Approval -- May 21, 1996 Corrections were requested as follows: 1) change June 6 to June 4 on page 2, paragraph 4; 2) add the phrase, “… or submit a report in writing.” on page 2, at the end of paragraph 5; and 3) indicate the unanimous vote for the Homestyle Harmony Item C2, on page 4, paragraph 2. The minutes were unanimously approved as corrected. B. Requests for Extension, Deferred and Continued Items B1. (cont. From 5/21/96) Trial Period Review - ROC. Lawler, Inc/Gregory Vance Moore/Debra Ann Delemeester (The Kennel Klub Bar & Grill, Inc) to permit nightclubs, taverns, and bars (change of business ownership) and package sales of beer, wine, and liquor (new license) at 1400 Cleveland St, Knollwood Replat, Blk 1, Lots 1-4, zoned CG (Commercial General). CU 95-63 In a letter dated May 24, 1996, representative E.D. Armstrong, Esq., requested a continuance until June 18, to accommodate the concerned residents who could not attend on June 4. One new letter was received in opposition to the request. Member Merriam moved to continue Item B1 to the meeting of June 18, 1996. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously C. Conditional Uses --None D. Annexation, Zoning, Land Use Plan Amendment, Land Development Code Text Amendment, and Local Planning Agency Review D1. A. The City of Clearwater proposes to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Clearwater and James A. Vogel and Hazel E. Vogel, Applicants, for property located on the east side of Landmark Drive, approximately 650 feet south of Enterprise Road, Clearwater, Florida, legally described as M&B 22.011 in Section 33-29-16. The Development Agreement authorizes the development of up to 34 single family residential units and up to 14,160 sq. ft. of office floor area. B. The Annexation and Zoning Atlas amendments described below are associated with the above development agreement: A 96-21 Tract A - Sec 33-28-16, M&B 22.011 less the South 509 ft more or less - Zone to OL (Limited Office) Tract B - Sec 33-28-16, M&B 22.011 less the North 160 ft more or less - Zone to RPD 5 (Residential Planned Development) Mr. Shuford reported the City Attorney received a fax reporting numerous concerns immediately prior to today’s hearing. Staff requested a continuance to the next meeting. Member Nixon moved to continue Item D1 to the meeting of June 18, 1996. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D2. UC (C) 1: Bounded on the North by Jones Street, on the East by Garden Avenue, on the South by Rogers Street, and the West by Osceola Avenue. UC (C) 2: Bounded on the North by Jones Street, on the East by Prospect Avenue, on the South by Turner Street, and the West by Garden Avenue. UC (E): Bounded on the North by Grove Street, on the East by Frederica Avenue, on the South by a line parallel to and one-half block south of Chestnut Street, and the West by Prospect Avenue. Mr. Shuford explained this item was approved by a vote of 4-1 on May 21. It was necessary to readvertise the item to correct language that inadvertently listed the boundary between UC(C)2 and UC(E) as Myrtle Avenue instead of Prospect Avenue. Attorney Harry Cline was present to speak in opposition on behalf of the owners of the “Eleven Hundred” building and the Dimmit properties. He expressed concern the land holdings are bisected by the proposed zoning boundaries and their associated height variations. Mr. Cline submitted a map suggesting where zoning lines could be redrawn to encompass the properties. Board members reiterated a similar concern regarding the Dimmit properties. While most agreed with the concept of height limits, some members did not agree that large property holdings should be subjected to extreme differences in their height limits. It was indicated zoning should remain flexible to incorporate creative development and maximize air space, open space and amenities. Mr. Shuford explained planning is not done based on property ownership. He said having property bisected by zoning lines is seen as reasonable justification for pursuing variances. Member Nixon moved to endorse Item D2 to the City Commission. Members, Nixon, Mazur, Merriam, Baron and Kunnen voted "Aye"; Members Keyes and Bickerstaffe voted "Nay." Motion carried. D3. Ordinance 6044-96 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Sections 35.11, 40.034, 40.035, 40.043, 40.044, 40.064, 40.065, 40.084, 40.104, 40.105, 40.124, 40.125, 40.134, 40.135, 40.144, 40.164, 40.165, 40.184, 40.185, 40.204, 40.205, 40.224, 40.225, 40.243.1, 40.244, 40.266, 40.284, 40.285, 40.304, 40.305, 40.324, 40.325, 40.344, 40.345, 40.365, 40.366, 40.384, 4.385, 40.404, 40.405, 40.424, 40.425, 40.434, 40.435, 40.444, 40.445, 40.464, 40.465, 40.474, 40.475, 40.484, 40.485, 40.504, 40.524, 40.525, 40.543, 40.545, and 41.053, Code of Ordinances, to define “Public Safety Facility,” to delete police substations from the supplementary standards for Utility Facility conditional uses, to allow public safety facilities as a permitted use in the Core and Eastern Corridor subdistricts of the Urban Center district and in the Public/Semipublic district, to allow public safety facilities as a conditional use in all residential districts, the Limited Office district, General Office district, Neighborhood Commercial District, North Greenwood Commercial District, Beach Commercial district, Resort Commercial 24 and 28 districts, General Commercial district, Infill Commercial district, Highway Commercial district, Commercial Center district, Downtown/Mixed Use district, Bayfront and transitional subdistricts of the Urban Center district, Limited Industrial district, and Research Development, and Office Park district, and to identify standards for approval for public safety facilities in the aforementioned districts where allowed as a conditional use to specify the applicability of the area thresholds set forth in the rules concerning the administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan as amended; providing an effective date. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating the ordinance was prepared to address issues identified by the Pinellas Planning Council regarding Ordinance 5971-96 revising the definition of “utility facility” to include police substations. No one was present to speak in support or opposition to the item. Member Bickerstaffe moved to endorse Item D3 to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D4. Ordinance 6045-96 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Sections 40.103, 40.324, 40.365, 40.384, 40.404, and 41.053, Code of Ordinances, to allow bed and breakfast inns as a conditional use in the Multiple Family Residential “ten” district, Neighborhood Commercial district, Beach Commercial district, and Resort Commercial 24 and 28 districts; providing an effective date. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating staff agreed and expanded on a citizen’s suggestion to allow bed and breakfast inns as conditional uses. It was indicated this use will be compatible with other uses in the above named districts and may create development opportunities consistent with City economic development goals. Questions were raised and discussion ensued regarding parking and square footage calculations, traffic volume, contribution to the City’s historical character, and the distinction between bed and breakfast inns and boarding houses. Mr. Shuford noted suggestions for clarification in Section 41.053 regarding supplementary standards. Member Mazur moved to endorse Item D4, with changes, to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Director’s Items 1. Presentation -- South Fort Harrison Zoning Study -- USF Florida Center for Community Design and Research Mr. Shuford said the City contracted with the Center to perform this market-based zoning analysis to forward one of Central Permitting’s goals of implementing community redevelopment projects. Consultants held public and individual meetings to gather information regarding the public’s desire for future development of the commercial and industrial areas between South Fort Harrison and South Myrtle Avenues, south of downtown. The meeting recessed from 2:25 to 2:35 p.m. to set up the audio-visual equipment for the presentation. John Marsh, Greg Ferrara, and Jay Texada gave an elaborate visual presentation highlighting the study area and a conceptual overview of three different zoning alternatives. They displayed photographs of undeveloped sites, comparing them with artists renderings of how the properties could be developed to incorporate mixed commercial, residential, and recreation uses. Studies of other communities show the workers in medical technology firms want to be in close proximity to apartments and townhouses, bicycle and pedestrian paths and restaurants. As medical technology firms have begun to express interest in moving into Clearwater, the consultants looked at creating flexible zoning areas near the Pinellas Trail to accommodate these high-tech businesses, with a view toward creating livable communities in which they would want to relocate. Discussion ensued regarding the zoning alternatives in relation to density issues. Mr. Marsh stressed that lack of zoning flexibility was brought up repeatedly in public meetings as one of the main concerns of property owners wanting to improve their properties. Research shows the neighbors of the well-buffered light industrial and research and development uses south of downtown are not at all opposed to such uses in the vicinity. The City has the opportunity to create a district with livability, character, and synergy between the Trail and medical technology companies. Once that decision is made, the City can market aggressively to those companies who want to come to places like Clearwater. Questions were raised regarding trail parking, and using the trail as partial buffering between residential uses and the CSX railroad. It was indicated, while having a trail spur along the waterfront seemed a very symbiotic relationship, they focused on the trail in its current location. The path of the northern Clearwater segment of the trail through abandoned car lots, salvage yards, warehouses and concrete manufacturing areas was a cause for concern. In summary, Mr. Shuford pointed out all three suggested alternatives appear to increase density with mixed use zoning, incorporating design components to create buffers and provide continuity from south to north. He questioned if the current method of fine tuning zoning to promote and buffer neighborhoods had created too many fine gradations in existing zoning. Mr. Marsh affirmed it had, and stated current zoning was not meeting market demand. He reiterated experience in the southern section shows neighbors are not disturbed by the industrial uses and many support mixed commercial and residential structures. It was indicated this concept would be an excellent means to increase the tax base, bring in another generation of workers and create a better quality of life downtown. Consensus was to support the concept of increasing density and maximizing open space. It was indicated promoting the convenient location and stability of the area will be a good selling point to new companies. Mr. Shuford stated the consultants did a good job of addressing the problems and suggestion solutions. The presentation will go to the City Commission and will undergo planning adaptation before being brought back to the board in a more refined form. The board recognized all the work that went into the presentation and thanked the consultants. Board and Staff Items Mr. Baron questioned what happened to the water purification use approved on the former Morrison’s Cafeteria site on Cleveland Street and a mini-storage use approved at South Fort Harrison Avenue and Belleair Road. Mr. Shuford said the mini-storage developer was unable to incorporate the City’s development requirements into his proposal and decided to pursue another property outside the City. Staff will check on the status of the water purification use. Mr. Shuford reported the lobbyist registration ordinance will be modified to exempt department directors and some advisory boards. Regulatory boards like the Planning and Zoning Board will not be exempted. The amended ordinance will be brought to the board. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 4:04 p.m.